ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Explainable AI: Machine Learning Interpretation in Blackcurrant Powders.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning in Sensory Analysis of Mead-A Case Study: Ensembles of Classifiers.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Contrasting rule and machine learning based digital self triage systems in the USA.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, explainability in machine and deep learning has become an important area in the field of research as well as interest, both due to the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) methods and understanding of the decisions made by models. The explainability of artificial intelligence (XAI) is due to the increasing consciousness in, among other things, data mining, error elimination, and learning performance by various AI algorithms. Moreover, XAI will allow the decisions made by models in problems to be more transparent as well as effective. In this study, models from the 'glass box' group of Decision Tree, among others, and the 'black box' group of Random Forest, among others, were proposed to understand the identification of selected types of currant powders. The learning process of these models was carried out to determine accuracy indicators such as accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score. It was visualized using Local Interpretable Model Agnostic Explanations (LIMEs) to predict the effectiveness of identifying specific types of blackcurrant powders based on texture descriptors such as entropy, contrast, correlation, dissimilarity, and homogeneity. Bagging (Bagging_100), Decision Tree (DT0), and Random Forest (RF7_gini) proved to be the most effective models in the framework of currant powder interpretability. The measures of classifier performance in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score for Bagging_100, respectively, reached values of approximately 0.979. In comparison, DT0 reached values of 0.968, 0.972, 0.968, and 0.969, and RF7_gini reached values of 0.963, 0.964, 0.963, and 0.963. These models achieved classifier performance measures of greater than 96%. In the future, XAI using agnostic models can be an additional important tool to help analyze data, including food products, even online.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.