Pollen image classification using the classifynder system: Algorithm comparison and a case study on New Zealand honey
Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, ISSN: 2214-8019, Vol: 823, Page: 207-226
2015
- 22Citations
- 29Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations22
- Citation Indexes22
- 22
- CrossRef10
- Captures29
- Readers29
- 29
Book Chapter Description
We describe an investigation into how Massey University’s Pollen Classifynder can accelerate the understanding of pollen and its role in nature. The Classifynder is an imaging microscopy system that can locate, image and classify slide based pollen samples. Given the laboriousness of purely manual image acquisition and identification it is vital to exploit assistive technologies like the Classifynder to enable acquisition and analysis of pollen samples. It is also vital that we understand the strengths and limitations of automated systems so that they can be used (and improved) to compliment the strengths and weaknesses of human analysts to the greatest extent possible. This article reviews some of our experiences with the Classifynder system and our exploration of alternative classifier models to enhance both accuracy and interpretability. Our experiments in the pollen analysis problem domain have been based on samples from the Australian National University’s pollen reference collection (2,890 grains, 15 species) and images bundled with the Classifynder system (400 grains, 4 species). These samples have been represented using the Classifynder image feature set.We additionally work through a real world case study where we assess the ability of the system to determine the pollen make-up of samples of New Zealand honey. In addition to the Classifynder’s native neural network classifier, we have evaluated linear discriminant, support vector machine, decision tree and random forest classifiers on these data with encouraging results. Our hope is that our findings will help enhance the performance of future releases of the Classifynder and other systems for accelerating the acquisition and analysis of pollen samples.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84913535745&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10984-8_12; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25381110; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-10984-8_12; https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-3-319-10984-8_12; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10984-8_12; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-10984-8_12
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know