MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403600396 · doi:10.3390/su16209061

A Computer Vision Model for Seaweed Foreign Object Detection Using Deep Learning

2024· article· en· W4403600396 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Omar Alhendi, Siti Hafizah Ab Hamid, Nurul Japar, Adibi M. Nor

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceObject detectionDeep learningComputer visionObject (grammar)Computer scienceAlgaePattern recognition (psychology)EcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seaweed foreign object detection has become crucial for food consumption and industrial use. This process not only can prevent potential health issues, but also maintain the overall marketability of seaweed production in the food industry. Traditional methods of inspecting seaweed foreign objects heavily rely on human judgment, which deals with large volumes with diverse impurities and can be inconsistent and inefficient. An automation system for real-time seaweed foreign object detection in the inspection process should be adopted. However, automated seaweed foreign object detection has several challenges due to its dependency on visual input inspection, such as an uneven surface and undistinguishable impurities. In fact, limited access to advanced technologies and high-cost equipment would also influence visual input acquisition, thereby hindering the advancement of seaweed foreign object detection in this field. Therefore, we introduce a computer vision model utilizing a deep learning-based algorithm to detect seaweed impurities and classify the samples into ‘clean’ and ‘unclean’ categories. In this study, we managed to identify six types of seaweed impurities including sand sticks, shells, discolored seaweed, grass, worm shells, and mixed impurities. We collected 1204 images and our model’s performance was thoroughly evaluated based on comparisons with three pre-trained models, i.e., Yolov8, ResNet, and MobileNet. Our experiment shows that Yolov8 outperforms the other two models with an accuracy of 98.86%. This study also included the development of an Android application to validate the deep learning engine to ensure its optimal performance. Based on our experiments, the mobile application managed to classify 50 pieces of seaweed samples within 0.2 s each, showcasing its potential use in large-scale production lines and factories. This research demonstrates the impact of Artificial Intelligence on food safety by offering a scalable and efficient solution that can be deployed in other food production processes facing similar challenges. Our approach paves the way for broader industry adoption and advancements in automated foreign object detection systems by optimizing detection accuracy and speed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207