2013 International Conference on Computing, Management and Telecommunications (ComManTel) 2013
DOI: 10.1109/commantel.2013.6482379
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computer aided plant identification system

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To make classification more efficient, four color features ('mean', 'standard deviation', 'kurtosis', 'skewness') are extracted along with five texture features. Majority of the previous studied have used only shape features [8,11,12,[15][16][17][18] for plant identification. This study however, emphasises on texture and color features because shape features cannot always correctly identify a plant.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To make classification more efficient, four color features ('mean', 'standard deviation', 'kurtosis', 'skewness') are extracted along with five texture features. Majority of the previous studied have used only shape features [8,11,12,[15][16][17][18] for plant identification. This study however, emphasises on texture and color features because shape features cannot always correctly identify a plant.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pham et al [11] in their computer-aided plant identification system compared the performance of two feature descriptors i.e. histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) and Hu moments.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We obtained an average accuracy of 96.48% for our data set. We compared the accuracy of our system with other systems in Table I, based on DMF and PNN [4], SURF with SVM [17], HOG with SVM [21] and FFD with k-NN [22].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The classification framework use SIFT features in [4] 90.31% SURF SVM [17] 95.94% Method proposed in [23] 71.4% SVM+HOG [21] 84.68% FFD+ kNN [22] 95.66% Our method 96.48% Fig. 7.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another substantially studied local feature approach is the histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) descriptor (Pham, Le, Grard, & Nguyen, 2013). The HOG descriptor, introduced by (Lowe, 2004) is similar to SIFT, except that it uses an overlapping local contrast normalization across neighbouring cells grouped into a block.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%