MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408253036 · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.124803

Effect of training sample size, image resolution and epochs on filamentous and floc-forming bacteria classification using machine learning

2025· article· en· W4408253036 on OpenAlexafffund
Sama Alani, Hui Guo, Sheila Fyfe, Zebo Long, Sylvain Donnaz, Younggy Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsSuez (Canada)McMaster University
FundersGlobal Water FuturesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSample (material)Artificial intelligenceResolution (logic)BacteriaTraining (meteorology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionComputer scienceBiologyChemistryChromatographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer vision techniques can expedite the detection of bacterial growth in wastewater treatment plants and alleviate some of the shortcomings associated with traditional detection methods. In recent years, researchers capitalized on this potential by developing segmentation algorithms that were specifically tailored to identify the overgrowth of filamentous bacteria and the risk of sludge bulking. This study investigated the optimization of an artificial intelligence (AI) segmentation model in terms of accuracy metrics and computational requirements. Specifically, three model variables were tested, including training sample size, image resolution, and number of training epochs. The results indicated that larger sample sizes resulted in higher output accuracy up to a certain limit (300 images), beyond which no significant improvements were observed. High image resolution (788 × 530) provided more details for the deep learning model to detect the fine edges between bacteria albeit with significant additional computational requirements. The addition of more training epochs resulted in a minor increase in segmentation accuracy, particularly for thin interconnected filamentous bacteria. Overall, high resolution and epochs did not have a major effect when the sample size was large (300 and 500 images). The findings highlight the optimal balance between model accuracy and computational demands, emphasizing the importance of prioritizing diverse training samples with sufficient sample size. This approach is critical for large-scale implementation, as it enhances the potential of AI to deliver timely and accurate predictions, leading to early warnings of wastewater treatment issues such as sludge bulking. • A deep learning image classification model was trained and optimized on image data. • Three parameters were tested: sample size, image resolution, and training epochs. • Larger sample sizes improved accuracy up to 300 images, beyond which gains plateaued. • High image resolution improved edge detection with significant computation requirements. • More training epochs slightly enhanced accuracy, especially for filamentous bacteria.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental ManagementSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207