Yasar
Yasar
Yasar
Submitted by:
Enba Sankar S (950522104701)
Siva Mathan S (950522104302)
Athi Sankar Sarathy N (950522104301)
Yasar Ali M (95052210460)
Muhammad Ibrahim S S (950522104029)
DR.SIVANTHIADITANAR COLLEGE OF
ENGINEERING,TIRUCHENDUR ANNA UNIVERSITY
CHENNAI 600 025
ABSTRACT:
1. Introduction
2. Methodology
2.1 Data Collection and Preprocessing
2.2 Feature Extraction
2.3 Model Training And Validation
2.4 Ensemble Learning
2.5 Evaluation
2.6 Deployment And Integration
3.Softwares Used
4. Experimental Setup
4.1 Dataset Selection
4.2 Data Preprocessing
4.3 Training Configuration
4.4 Training Process
4.5 Hardware And Software
5. Results
5.1 Model Performance
5.2 Comparison Of Techniques
5.3 Visualization of Results
5.4 Discussion
6. Conclusion
7.
INTRODUCTION:
The identification and classification of plant species play a critical role in
various fields, including biodiversity conservation, agriculture, and
ecological research. Traditionally, this process has relied on manual
observation and expert knowledge, which can be time-consuming,
laborintensive, and prone to human error. However, with the advent of
advanced data science techniques, particularly in the realm of image
recognition, there has been a paradigm shift towards automated
methods for plant species classification.
2. Feature Extraction:
- Use pre-trained CNN models to extract features from the
images.
- Fine-tune the model if needed for better performance.
4. Ensemble Learning:
- Combine multiple models to improve classification accuracy.
5. Evaluation:
- Assess the model's performance on a test set using various
metrics.
6.Git / GitHub: Version control system and platform used for managing
project codebase, tracking changes, and facilitating collaboration among
team members
.
7.IDEs: Integrated Development Environments such as Visual Studio
Code, PyCharm, or JupyterLab used for code editing, debugging, and
project management.
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP:
1. Model Performance:
Our best-performing model achieved an accuracy of 93.5% on the
test dataset, outperforming baseline models by a significant margin.
Precision, recall, and F1-score metrics showed consistent
improvements across all models, indicating robust classification
performance.
2. Comparison of Techniques:
Data preprocessing techniques, including image augmentation,
contributed to enhancing model generalization and reducing
overfitting.
Transfer learning and fine-tuning strategies demonstrated the
capability to adapt pre-trained CNN models to the plant species
classification task effectively.
Ensemble learning methods, particularly bagging, showed promise
in further improving classification accuracy by combining multiple
models.
3. Visualization of Results:
Confusion matrices provided insights into the distribution of true
positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative
predictions across different plant species.
Graphical representations facilitated a comparative analysis of
model performance, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses
of each approach.
4. Discussion:
The observed performance of our models underscores the
potential of data science techniques in automating plant species
classification tasks.
Our findings have implications for biodiversity conservation,
agriculture, and ecological research, offering faster and more
accurate methods for species identification.
Further investigation is warranted to explore additional factors
influencing classification performance and to optimize model
scalability for large-scale applications.
CONCLUSION: