REVIEW 1 cited by
A 1d convolutional network for leaf and time series classification
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In this paper, a 1d convolutional neural network is designed for classification tasks of plant leaves. This network based classifier is analyzed in two directions. In the forward direction, the proposed network can be used in two ways: a classifier and an automatic feature extractor. As a classifier, it takes the simple centroid contour distance curve as the single feature and achieves comparable performance with state-of-art methods that usually require multiple extracted features. As a feature extractor, it produces nearly linear separable features, hence can be used together with other classifiers such as support vector machines to provide better performance. The proposed network adopts simple 1d input and is generally applicable for other tasks such as classifying one dimensional time series in an end-to-end fashion without changes. Experiments on some benchmark datasets show this architecture can provide classification accuracies that are comparable or higher than some existing methods. In the backward direction, methods like gradient-weighted class activation mapping and maximum activation map of neurons in the classification layer with respect to inputs are performed to help investigate and further validate that hidden signatures helping trigger the trained classifier's specific decisions can be human interpretable. Code for the paper is available at https://github.com/dykuang/Leaf_Project.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
OneNet: A Channel-Wise 1D Convolutional U-Net
A U-Net variant using channel-wise 1D convolutions and pixel-shuffle operations substantially reduces model size, but the claim of accuracy preservation is contradicted by the paper's own results on general datasets.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.