MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A manifold intelligent decision system for fusion and benchmarking of deep waste-sorting models

2024· article· en· W4391383156 on OpenAlexaff
Karrar Hameed Abdulkareem, Mohammed Ahmed Subhi, Mazin Abed Mohammed, Mayas Aljibawi, Jan Nedoma, Radek Martínek, Muhammet Deveci, Wen‐Long Shang, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersOstravská Univerzita v OstravěMinisterstvo Školství, Mládeže a TělovýchovyEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmarkingSortingArtificial intelligenceManifold (fluid mechanics)Decision support systemFusionDeep learningMachine learningOperations researchAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increases in population and prosperity are linked to a worldwide rise in garbage. The “classification” and “recycling” of solid waste is a crucial tactic for dealing with the waste problem. This paper presents a new two-layer intelligent decision system for waste sorting based on fused features of Deep Learning (DL) models as well as a selection of an optimal deep Waste-Sorting Model (WSM) based on Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). A dataset comprising 1451 samples of images of waste, distributed across four classes – cardboard (403), glass (501), metal (410), and general trash (137), was used for sorting. This study proposes a Multi-Fused Decision Matrix (MFDM) based on identified fusion score level rules, evaluation criteria, and deep fused waste-sorting models. Five fusion rules used in the sorting process and the evaluation perspectives into the MFDM are sum, weighted sum, product, maximum, and minimum rules. Additionally, each of entropy and Visekriterijumska Optimizacija i Kompromisno Resenje in Serbian (VIKOR) methods was used for weighting selected criteria as well as ranking deep WSMs. The highest accuracy rate of 98% was scored by ResNet50-GoogleNet- Inception based on the minimum rule. However, under the same rule, an insufficient accuracy rate of sorting was presented by ResNet50-GoogleNet-Xception. Since Qi = 0 for Inception-Xception, the final output based on MCDM methods indicates that the fused Inception-Xception model outperforms the other fused deep WSMs, which achieved the lowest values of Qi. Thus, Inception-Xception was chosen as the best deep waste-sorting model based on images of waste, multiple evaluation criteria, and different fusion perspectives. The mean and standard deviation metrics were both used to validate the selection findings objectively. The suggested approach can aid urban decision-makers in prioritizing and choosing an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-optimized optimal sorting model.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering Applications of Artificial IntelligenceSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207