MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of A Qr Code System for Tree Species Identification

2023· article· en· W6888835595 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQR Code Applications and Technologies
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScripting languageIdentification (biology)Tree (set theory)JavaScriptCode (set theory)Web application

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trees provide a wide range of benefits to humans and other living organisms. An accurate method tree species identification will improve their management and conservation. Also, tree identification and description are crucial for genetic study, biodiversity conservation, management and regeneration strategies. The conventional methods of tree identification are time-consuming and requires a high level of expertise, necessitating development of a more efficient tree identification means. In this research, a QR code system for tree identification was developed. Tree data were collected from campuses of two tertiary institutions in Akure, Nigeria: Federal University of Technology and Federal College of Agriculture. System design was built around a three-tier architectural model. PostgresSQL was used as the Database System, the lowest tier. The Middle tier is the Web Server, Apache HTTP Server. Php 8.1 was the scripting language that communicates with the database. For the Client tier, HTML, CSS and Javascript were used. The QR code generator was developed using PHP 8.1. The PHP script used a QR code library to generate the QR code image. The QR code is linked to the website database containing all tree species information. The generated QR codes were attached to trees, and when scanned, the website is automatically launched and the tree information is retrieved. A survey was conducted to get end-users’ feedback within the study sites. The results obtained revealed that the QR codes are easy to use, and can make tree identification more interesting, thus increasing people’s knowledge about trees and improving Trees management.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.015

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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicQR Code Applications and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207