Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35957349›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Assessment of Various Machine Learning Models for Peach Maturity Prediction Using Non-Destructive Sensor Data.

Dejan Ljubobratović, Marko Vuković, Marija Brkić Bakarić, Tomislav Jemrić, Maja Matetić

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Dejan LjubobratovićFaculty of Informatics and Digital Technologies, University of Rijeka, Radmile Matejčić 2, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0002-9683-3204
Marko VukovićDivision of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Department of Pomology, Svetošimunska cesta 25, University of Zagreb Faculty of Agriculture, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0001-7889-6888
Marija Brkić BakarićFaculty of Informatics and Digital Technologies, University of Rijeka, Radmile Matejčić 2, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0003-4079-4012
Tomislav JemrićDivision of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Department of Pomology, Svetošimunska cesta 25, University of Zagreb Faculty of Agriculture, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0002-6672-1834
Maja MatetićFaculty of Informatics and Digital Technologies, University of Rijeka, Radmile Matejčić 2, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0003-4571-1546

Funding

University of Rijeka uniri-drustv-18-122.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To date, many machine learning models have been used for peach maturity prediction using non-destructive data, but no performance comparison of the models on these datasets has been conducted. In this study, eight machine learning models were trained on a dataset containing data from 180 'Suncrest' peaches. Before the models were trained, the dataset was subjected to dimensionality reduction using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regularization, and 8 input variables (out of 29) were chosen. At the same time, a subgroup consisting of the peach ground color measurements was singled out by dividing the set of variables into three subgroups and by using group LASSO regularization. This type of variable subgroup selection provided valuable information on the contribution of specific groups of peach traits to the maturity prediction. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values of the selected models were compared, and the artificial neural network (ANN) model achieved the best performance, with an average AUC of 0.782. The second-best machine learning model was linear discriminant analysis with an AUC of 0.766, followed by logistic regression, gradient boosting machine, random forest, support vector machines, a classification and regression trees model, and k-nearest neighbors. Although the primary parameter used to determine the performance of the model was AUC, accuracy, F1 score, and kappa served as control parameters and ultimately confirmed the obtained results. By outperforming other models, ANN proved to be the most accurate model for peach maturity prediction on the given dataset.

Indexed as

Prunus persicaLogistic ModelsMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerSupport Vector Machineartificial neural networksAUCdimensionality reductionfruit qualitygroup lassolasso regularizationmachine learningnon-destructive measurementspeach maturity prediction

Identifiers

PMID35957349
PMCPMC9371007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.