Deep learning-based arecanut detection for X-ray radiography: improving performance and efficiency for automated classification and quality control
Source abstract
Abstract
X-ray radiography is a valuable, non-destructive tool and can be used to examine the internal components or quality attributes of agricultural commodities, including arecanut. The true quality of an arecanut can be determined using destructive methods through visual inspection. However, dissected arecanuts do not have a shelf life. There is no non-destructive method available for grading arecanuts. We employ X-ray imaging as an aid to conduct internal examinations of arecanuts, allowing for thorough inspection without causing damage. A custom X-ray image dataset of arecanuts is created for automated interpretation of grades. We developed a hybrid arecanut grading model using YOLOv5s architecture incorporating the Stem, the GhostNet and the Transformer blocks. The proposed hybrid architecture outperforms in comparison with state-of-the-art models with a mean average precision (mAP) of 97.30%. The proposed 9.5 MB lightweight model can easily fit into X-ray devices, making it ideal for detecting arecanut grades in the industry. This method could transform the standards of quality inspection for arecanut. Its incorporation could establish a new industry benchmark for unparalleled quality assessment using X-ray technology as a non-destructive tool.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Spectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses · Spectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Information Technology, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Mangaluru, India
Funding
no funding associated
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. Tiwari D, Talreja S. A pharmacological and medicinal study of areca palm and nuts: an overview. Res J Pharm Biol Chem Sci. 2020 09;11:100–108.
2. 10.3390/foods1209174910.3390/foods12091749 ↗
3. 10.35940/ijrte.F8389.03862010.35940/ijrte.F8389.038620 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.protcy.2012.05.03210.1016/j.protcy.2012.05.032 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.11.04110.1016/j.camwa.2011.11.041 ↗
6. 10.1109/ICATCCT.2015.745697110.1109/ICATCCT.2015.7456971 ↗
7. Pushparani KM, Kumar V, Gubbi A. Arecanut grade analysis using image processing techniques. Int J Recent Technol Eng (IJRTE). 2019;7(10):1–6.
8. 10.17762/turcomat.v12i11.593110.17762/turcomat.v12i11.5931 ↗
9. Chandrashekhara H. Classification of arecanut using neural networks with feed-forward techniques. Int J Res Advent Tech. 2019;7(3):998–1003.
10. 10.1007/978-3-030-84760-9_810.1007/978-3-030-84760-9_8 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.phytochem.2016.02.00210.1016/j.phytochem.2016.02.002 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.gltp.2021.01.00410.1016/j.gltp.2021.01.004 ↗
13. 10.1051/agro:200803910.1051/agro:2008039 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.11318610.1016/j.indcrop.2020.113186 ↗
15. 10.1017/s096025851600023410.1017/s0960258516000234 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.aiia.2019.05.00110.1016/j.aiia.2019.05.001 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.jspr.2023.10214510.1016/j.jspr.2023.102145 ↗
18. 10.3390/foods1201013210.3390/foods12010132 ↗
19. 10.1007/978-3-642-31686-9_4110.1007/978-3-642-31686-9_41 ↗
20. 10.1006/fstl.1997.032010.1006/fstl.1997.0320 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2014.02.01610.1016/j.postharvbio.2014.02.016 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2016.07.01210.1016/j.postharvbio.2016.07.012 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.09.02010.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.09.020 ↗
24. 10.35940/ijitee.B1114.1292S1910.35940/ijitee.B1114.1292S19 ↗
25. 10.3390/s2023675310.3390/s20236753 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.10717010.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107170 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2021.11337810.1016/j.indcrop.2021.113378 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.11492510.1016/j.eswa.2021.114925 ↗
29. Thomas S, Thomas J. Non-destructive silkworm pupa gender classification with X-ray images using ensemble learning. Artif Intell Agri. 2022;6:100–110. https://linkingManipal, Karnataka, Indiahub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2589721722000083.
30. 10.1080/10589759.2022.207441510.1080/10589759.2022.2074415 ↗
31. Tzutalin. Labelimg [Free software: Mit license]; 2015. https://github.com/tzutalin/labelImg.
32. 10.5281/zenodo.734792610.5281/zenodo.7347926 ↗
33. Iandola FN, Moskewicz MW, Ashraf K, et al. Squeezenet: alexnet-level accuracy with 50x fewer parameters and <1mb model size. CoRR. 2016. http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.07360
34. Howard AG, Zhu M, Chen B, et al. Mobilenets: efficient convolutional neural networks for mobile vision applications. CoRR. 2017. http://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04861
35. Zhang X, Zhou X, Lin M, et al. Shufflenet: an extremely efficient convolutional neural network for mobile devices. CoRR. 2017. http://arxiv.org/abs/1707.01083
36. Han K Wang Y Tian Q et al. Ghostnet: more features from cheap operations; 2019. https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.11907.10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.00165 ↗
37. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, et al. Attention is all you need. CoRR. 2017. http://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762
38. Dosovitskiy A, Beyer L, Kolesnikov A, et al. An image is worth 16x16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale. CoRR. 2020. https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.11929
39. 10.1016/j.neunet.2017.12.01210.1016/j.neunet.2017.12.012 ↗
40. Ruder S. An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms. Comment: Added Derivations of AdaMax and Nadam. 2016. http://arxiv.org/abs/1609.04747
41. Naik PM, Rudra B Flower phenotype recognition and analysis using yolov5 models. 13th International conference on advances in computing, control, and telecommunication technologies, ACT 2022; Vol. 8; 2022. p. 838–848. www.scopus.com.
42. 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2017.02.00210.1016/j.postharvbio.2017.02.002 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.11216210.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112162 ↗