MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392760641 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4074664/v1

Automated Fruit Identification using Modified AlexNet Feature Extraction based FSSATM Classifier

2024· preprint· en· W4392760641 on OpenAlexaff
M. Arunadevi Thirumalraj, B Rajalakshmi, B. Santosh Kumar, S. Stephe

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Classifier (UML)Feature extractionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<title>Abstract</title> Because fruits are complex, automating their identification is a constant challenge. Manual fruit categorisation is a difficult task since fruit types and subtypes are often location-dependent. A sum of recent publications has classified the Fruit-360 dataset using methods based on Convolutional Neural Networks (e.g., VGG16, Inception V3, MobileNet, and ResNet18). Unfortunately, out of all 131 fruit classifications, none of them are extensive enough to be used. Furthermore, these models did not have the optimum computational efficiency. Here we propose a new, robust, and all-encompassing research that identifies and predicts the whole Fruit-360 dataset, which consists of 90,483 sample photos and 131 fruit classifications. The research gap was successfully filled using an algorithm that is based on the Modified AlexNet with an efficient classifier. The input photos are processed by the modified AlexNet, which uses the Golden jackal optimisation algorithm (GJOA) to choose the best tuning of the feature extraction technique. Lastly, the classifier employed is Fruit Shift Self Attention Transform Mechanism (FSSATM). This transform mechanism is aimed to improve the transformer's accuracy and comprises a spatial feature extraction module (SFE) besides spatial position encoding (SPE). Iterations and a confusion matrix were used to validate the algorithm. The outcomes prove that the suggested tactic yields a relative accuracy of 98%. Furthermore, state-of-the-art procedures for the drive were located in the literature and compared to the built system. By comparing the results, it is clear that the newly created algorithm is capable of efficiently processing the whole Fruit-360 dataset.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207