2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.01.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tenderness classification of fresh broiler breast fillets using visible and near-infrared hyperspectral imaging

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
25
1
Order By: Relevance
“…2015 19 , Park et al., 2017 20 ) 23 Fluorescence (3) 6,7,8 Reflectance (12) 1,2,3,4,5,9,11,12,13,14,15,16 Transmittance (1) 10,17,18,19,20 Vis (3) 6,7,8 Vis-NIR (11) 1,2,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 SWIR (3) 3,4,5 ANOVA (2) 8,18 Band ratio (3) 6,11,12,14,16 Fuzzy logic (2) 1,2 kNN (2) 20 LDA (2) 19,20 Mahalanobis distance (2) 19,20 PCA (9) 6,7,8,13,15,16,18,20 PLS-DA (1) 20 PLSR (5) 3,4,5,18 QDA (3) 17,19,20 Qualitative analysis (2) 9,10 SIMCA (1) 18 SVM (2) 17,19,20 Physical defects ( Chao et al., 2002 1 ; Du et al., 2007 2 ; Fletcher and Kong, 2003 3 ; I. Kim, Kim et al., 2004 4 ; T. Kim et al., 2010b 5 ; Kong, 2003 6 ; Kong et al., 2004 7 ; Nakariyakul and Casasent, 2004 , Nakariyakul and Casasent, 2009 8,9 ; Yoon et al., 2008 10 ) 10 Fluorescence (6) 2,3,45,6,7 Reflectance (4) 1,8,9,10 Transmittance (1) 10 Vis (7) 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 Vis-NIR (3) 1,9,10 ABB algorithm (1) 9 Fuzzy logic (4) 1,4,6,7 LDA (1) 5 PCA (5) 1,3,7,8,10 SVM (1) 2,3 Product quality ( Elmasry et al., 2010 1 ; Iqbal et al., 2013 2 ; Jia et al., 2017 3 ; Jiang, Yoon, Zhuang, Wang, Lawrence, et al., 2018 4 ; Jiang, Yoon, Zhuang, Wang, Li, et al., 2018 5 ; Kandpal et al., 2013 6 ; Khulal et al., 2016 7 ; Khulal et al., 2017 8 ; Xiong et al., 2014 9 ; Xiong, Sun, Xie, Han and Wang, 2015 10 ; Y. Yang, Wang e...…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2015 19 , Park et al., 2017 20 ) 23 Fluorescence (3) 6,7,8 Reflectance (12) 1,2,3,4,5,9,11,12,13,14,15,16 Transmittance (1) 10,17,18,19,20 Vis (3) 6,7,8 Vis-NIR (11) 1,2,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 SWIR (3) 3,4,5 ANOVA (2) 8,18 Band ratio (3) 6,11,12,14,16 Fuzzy logic (2) 1,2 kNN (2) 20 LDA (2) 19,20 Mahalanobis distance (2) 19,20 PCA (9) 6,7,8,13,15,16,18,20 PLS-DA (1) 20 PLSR (5) 3,4,5,18 QDA (3) 17,19,20 Qualitative analysis (2) 9,10 SIMCA (1) 18 SVM (2) 17,19,20 Physical defects ( Chao et al., 2002 1 ; Du et al., 2007 2 ; Fletcher and Kong, 2003 3 ; I. Kim, Kim et al., 2004 4 ; T. Kim et al., 2010b 5 ; Kong, 2003 6 ; Kong et al., 2004 7 ; Nakariyakul and Casasent, 2004 , Nakariyakul and Casasent, 2009 8,9 ; Yoon et al., 2008 10 ) 10 Fluorescence (6) 2,3,45,6,7 Reflectance (4) 1,8,9,10 Transmittance (1) 10 Vis (7) 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 Vis-NIR (3) 1,9,10 ABB algorithm (1) 9 Fuzzy logic (4) 1,4,6,7 LDA (1) 5 PCA (5) 1,3,7,8,10 SVM (1) 2,3 Product quality ( Elmasry et al., 2010 1 ; Iqbal et al., 2013 2 ; Jia et al., 2017 3 ; Jiang, Yoon, Zhuang, Wang, Lawrence, et al., 2018 4 ; Jiang, Yoon, Zhuang, Wang, Li, et al., 2018 5 ; Kandpal et al., 2013 6 ; Khulal et al., 2016 7 ; Khulal et al., 2017 8 ; Xiong et al., 2014 9 ; Xiong, Sun, Xie, Han and Wang, 2015 10 ; Y. Yang, Wang e...…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of kernel functions exist, namely, linear kernel function, radial basis function (RBF), polynomial kernel function, and polynomial function. In the present study, SVM was built using RBF because previous researches confirm that RBF is a more compatible supported kernel function . The penalty coefficient ( c ) of the SVM model and the kernel width ( g ) of the kernel function must be determined.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the present study, SVM was built using RBF because previous researches confirm that RBF is a more compatible supported kernel function. [26][27][28] The penalty coefficient (c) of the SVM model and the kernel width (g) of the kernel function must be determined. The optimal combination of (c, g) was determined by a grid-search procedure and the ranges of c and g were both 2 −10 to 2 10 .…”
Section: Multivariate Data Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, they could not accurately display the detailed differences among the different pixels within the sample. The third method was to develop a qualitative or quantitative model first, and then predict the categories or values of each pixel within the samples in a pixel-based manner so that the variation from sample to sample and even spot to spot could be easily interpretable [40][41][42][43][44][45]. Therefore, the third method was adopted to describe the procedure of creating visual images for quantitative spatial distribution of adulteration levels in chicken meat.…”
Section: Visualization Of Carrageenan Adulteration Levelsmentioning
confidence: 99%