| Literature DB >> 32102200 |
Yuhua Li1, Fengjie Wang1, Ye Sun1, Yingxu Wang1.
Abstract
Accurate, rapid and non-destructive disease identification in the early stage of infection is essential to ensure the safe and efficient production of greenhouse cucumbers. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of most existing methods relies on the disease already exhibiting obvious symptoms in the middle to late stages of infection. Therefore, this paper presents an early identification method for cucumber diseases based on the techniques of hyperspectral imaging and machine learning, which consists of two procedures. First, reconstruction fidelity terms and graph constraints are constructed based on the decision criterion of the collaborative representation classifier and the desired spatial distribution of spectral curves (391 to 1044 nm) respectively. The former constrains the same-class and different-class reconstruction residuals while the latter constrains the weighted distances between spectral curves. They are further fused to steer the design of an offline algorithm. The algorithm aims to train a linear discriminative projection to transform the original spectral curves into a low dimensional space, where the projected spectral curves of different diseases own better separation trends. Then, the collaborative representation classifier is utilized to achieve online early diagnosis. Five experiments were performed on the hyperspectral data collected in the early infection stage of cucumber anthracnose and Corynespora cassiicola diseases. Experimental results demonstrated that the proposed method was feasible and effective, providing a maximal identification accuracy of 98.2% and an average online identification time of 0.65 ms. The proposed method has a promising future in practical production due to its high diagnostic accuracy and short diagnosis time.Entities:
Keywords: collaborative representation; cucumber disease identification; discriminative projection; graph constraint; hyperspectral imaging
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32102200 PMCID: PMC7070827 DOI: 10.3390/s20041217
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The flowchart of the CRC-steered discriminative projection learning method (CRC-DP).
Figure 2(a) Two classes of data; (b) 100 points from each class; (c) the one-dimensional results using different DR methods.
Figure 3The variances of 13 features on the wine data.
Figure 4The two-dimensional results of the wine data using different dimension-reduction (DR) methods: (a) CRC-steered discriminative projection learning method (CRC-DP); (b) locality preserving projection (LPP); (c) neighborhood preserving embedding (NPE); (d) principal component analysis (PCA); (e) sparsity preserving projection (SPP).
Figure 5The coverage areas of spectral curves corresponding to different diseases: (a) normal, anthracnose and Corynespora cassiicola; (b) anthracnose and Corynespora cassiicola; (c) normal and Corynespora cassiicola; (d) normal and anthracnose.
The identification accuracies and the number of incorrectly diagnosed samples of different methods (for each disease, the quantitative results from top to bottom are the classification accuracy and the number of samples that were wrongly judged, respectively).
| Disease | Methods | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KNN | RF | NB | DA | SVM | CRC-DP | |
| Corynespora Cassiicola | 95% | 96.4% | 92.20 | 95.00% | 95.60% | 96.80% |
| 25 | 18 | 39 | 25 | 22 | 16 | |
| Cucumber Anthracnose | 93.20% | 94.6% | 95% | 94.20% | 94.00% | 97.80% |
| 34 | 27 | 25 | 29 | 30 | 11 | |
| Total | 96.07% | 97.00% | 95.73% | 96.40% | 96.53% | 98.20% |
| 59 | 45 | 64 | 54 | 52 | 27 | |
Figure 6The identification accuracy versus the reduced sample dimension m.
Mean online identification time of each query sample for three-class classification.
| Methods | KNN | RF | NB | DA | SVM | CRC-DP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time ( | 0.4454 | 3.700 | 0.3463 | 0.2290 | 0.0012 | 0.6537 |
Figure 7(a) The collaborative representation coefficients of a query sample from the first class; (b) the reconstruction residuals corresponding to each disease.
Figure 8(a) Comparison results of the CRC-DP method with and without graph constraint; (b) identification accuracy versus the enrollment size by CRC-DP method.