Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compag

Original papers

Study of shrimp recognition methods using smart networks T

a,⁎ a b
Zihao Liu , Xiaojun Jia , Xinsheng Xu
a
College of Mathematics, Physics and Information Engineering, Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang 314001, PR China
b
College of Quality and Safety Engineering, China Jiliang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310018, PR China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Traditional shrimp recognition algorithms, based on machine vision, commonly utilize human-designed fea-
Shrimp classification tures, which are heavily dependent on human experience and can be inefficient and inaccurate. A smart deep
Deep convolutional neural networks convolutional neural network, using the improved LeNet-5 structure (ShrimpNet), is proposed to address this
Validation accuracy problem. Shrimp image segmentation, normalization and data augmentation were initially performed. Given the
Machine vision
morphological differences in the external features of shrimp, the LeNet-5 structure was modified into a three-
layer parallel structure for efficient matching and identification. A combination classifier strategy was subse-
quently added into the fully connected layers to strengthen the feature expression in the corresponding classes.
Finally, different architectures were explored by shrinking the depth and width to search for effective network
structures that could act as alternatives for practical applications and reveal the practical use of ShrimpNet.
Experimental results revealed that the smaller model (ShrimpNet-3) could achieve a validation accuracy of
96.84% and a modeling time of 0.47 h for the constructed dataset. Therefore, the proposed method is promising
for shrimp classification and quality measurement of production lines.

1. Introduction
With the increasing demand for food quality safety, high-quality
and pollution-free food is desired by people worldwide. The main-
stream methods for food quality detection are nondestructive.
Nondestructive methods are used in many research fields, such as ve-
getable freshness inspection (Pu et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2014a, 2015),
fruit external quality measurement (Arendse et al., 2015; Blasco et al.,
2017; Nicolai et al., 2014), seafood quality grading (Borresen, 2018;
Hassoun and Karoui, 2017; Kim et al., 2017) and fruit juice level
classification (Chakraborty et al., 2014; Fernandez-Lozano et al., 2013).
Fresh shrimp are harvested from shrimp cultivation ponds manu-
ally, and some defective or diseased shrimp are typically mixed in with
sound shrimp. These “dirty” shrimp include shrimp infected with bac-
teria or viruses, crushed shrimp, broken shrimp, and shrimp that have
died from lack of oxygen. If the “dirty” shrimp are not recognized and
removed quickly, they pose a significant threat to the fresh shrimp
clusters and can deteriorate the overall shrimp product quality. In most
Chinese shrimp processing companies, a simple visual inspection by
trained inspectors is performed for at least 10 kg of every 1 t of shrimp.
The percentage of defective or diseased shrimp in the sample can be
used to grade the specific shrimp class. This operation is time-con-
suming, and consistency between different operators is not guaranteed
(Ni et al., 2019; Zihao et al., 2016a). Therefore, many researchers have
tried to improve the shrimp product quality and promote shrimp
quality improvement strategies based on machine vision technology.
Machine vision, as a type of nondestructive technology, is extensively
applied in agriculture product quality detections and measurements,
especially for shrimp-related products.
Harbitz (2007) proposed a linear model for shrimp length mea-
surements based on a log-log scale of the length in relation to the pixel
area. The results indicated that less than 0.01 s per shrimp was required
by the image processing algorithm. Lee et al. (2012) suggested a simple,
fast, and accurate shape analysis method using turn angle cross-corre-
lation. High recognition rates of 93.7% and 94.2% were achieved to
classify broken and good shrimp, respectively. Zhang et al., 2014b)
studied online shrimp detection equipment to eliminate broken shrimp
based on the Evolution-COnstructed (ECO) features and the AdaBoost
classifier. Approximately 95.1% of the overall classification accuracy
with a 0.948 precision rate and a 0.920 recall were obtained using the
constructed model. Hanmei (2015) originally proposed double
threshold segmentation and artificial neural network methods under
static conditions. These methods were respectively used to extract the
melanotic part and classify different melanotic levels of melanosis
shrimp, and high accuracy was achieved. Wei (2018) suggested two
types of methods to complete the recognition duties of fresh and cooked

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: lzh2017@cjlu.edu.cn (Z. Liu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2019.104926
Received 7 March 2019; Received in revised form 24 July 2019; Accepted 28 July 2019
Available online 12 August 2019
0168-1699/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Z. Liu, et al.
shrimp. Recognition of fresh shrimp was performed using the com-
pacting degree feature based on contour analysis, and 99.6% accuracy
was achieved. Recognition of cooked shrimp was performed using the
center of gravity moment feature based on template matching, and
99.4% accuracy was achieved.
Based on the abovementioned studies, many researchers have
sought the ideal characteristics for shrimp classification and the optimal
methods with minimal human intervention. Fortunately, most shrimp
classification algorithms are useful in specific situations. However, di-
rect use of these methods to solve multi-class shrimp classification
problems, as proposed herein faces two issues:
(i) Previous studies on shrimp classification involved human-designed
features, such as ECO (Zhang et al., 2014b), tail moment features
(TMFs) (Liu et al., 2016a), turn angle distribution analysis (TADA)
(Lee et al., 2012) and area ratios (Zihao et al., 2017). Designing and
optimizing of these elaborate features is time-consuming and in-
efficient.
(ii) Although some effective algorithms have been developed success-
fully based on shrimp characteristics, the false negative rate
reached 10 percent, that is, 10 percent bad shrimp were not de-
tected, leading to severe contamination of the fresh shrimp clusters.
Severe quality and safety problems can occur when these polluted
products are delivered to supermarkets.
To overcome the above problems in shrimp quality evaluation, a
novel deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) is proposed herein
based on the improved LeNet-5 structure (ShrimpNet). DCNNs have
provided theoretical answers to these questions (Arun et al., 2018;
Banerjee and Das, 2018; Li et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2018). DCNNs can
achieve state-of-the-art performance in many other image recognition
tasks, such as speech recognition (Zhao et al., 2019), face retrieval
(Dong et al., 2016), agriculture product quality measurements (Fuentes
et al., 2018), and image denoising (Zhang et al., 2010). Effective feature
extraction and representation is the quintessence of DCNN methods.
Large numbers of local features can be learned from the lower layer of
DCNNs. Integrating these tremendous local features into the overall
features of shrimp objects is the most fundamental work of ShrimpNet.
Some of the local features learned by the lower convolutional layers
appear to be meaningless individually, but grouping these local features
together layer-by -layer can have a large impact on the shrimp re-
cognition performance.
A smart and small DCNN structure was explored by combining
different efficient classifiers in this paper. Initially, a three-layer parallel
structure was developed based on the functions of different convolu-
tional strides. Optimization of the LeNet-5 structure from the top layer
to lower layers was successively performed to investigate the perfor-
mance of the newly formed nets. This step could provide insight into
the network’s internal structure. Finally, hyper-parameter optimization
steps were conducted to obtain better results. Modifications were per-
formed to solve the overfitting problem, which is the core reason for the
reduced validation accuracy. The contributions of this study are as
follows:
(i) The proposed ShrimpNet was successfully used to classify shrimp
using a DCNN.
(ii) Based on the external appearance of the shrimp, the network
structure was modified to a three-layer parallel structure for effi-
cient matching and identification.
(iii) Combination classifier thought was assembled into the combina-
tion layer to optimize the learned features by ShrimpNet.
The proposed ShrimpNet structure overcomes the over-fitting pro-
blem brought by the traditional DCNNs. Moreover, the newly con-
structed ShrimpNet can reduce the modeling time. Thus, a novel
method to automatically discern defective shrimp was attained.
2
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926
2. Methods and materials
2.1. Shrimp samples and system design
Shrimp samples were directly acquired from the Wu Mart
Supermarket and a shrimp product processing company (Economic
Development Zone of Hangzhou, China). Trained human experts from
the company classified these shrimp samples into nine categories:
crushed shrimp (CR), shrimp that lacked oxygen (LAO), shrimp that
lacked tail meat (LATM), shrimp that lacked tails (LAT), sound shrimp
(SS), red diseased shrimp (RD), red distorted shrimp (RDT), shrimp tail
meat (TM), and white fish (WF). A total of 565 sound shrimp and 1166
defective shrimp (134 CR, 123 LAO, 222 LATM, 80 LAM, 126 RD, 116
RDT, 80 TM, and 285 WF) were included in the dataset. In the har-
vested fresh shrimp clusters, some white fish, small grasses, and other
impurities are also harvested from the shrimp cultivation pond. Small
grasses and other impurities can be eliminated using a simple me-
chanical process based on size differences. However, it is difficult to
remove small white fish with sizes similar to the shrimp using me-
chanism methods (Liu et al., 2016a). The white fish mixed in the fresh
shrimp clusters are potential threats to the quality of fresh shrimp.
Thus, the white fish class is treated as one of the research objects in this
paper. Half of the samples were randomly selected from the dataset to
build a training set, whereas the remaining samples were used to build
a testing set. All the experimental results were presented as the average
of ten repeated experiment.
All the images were acquired online using a Charge Coupled Device
(CCD) camera (DFK-23G618, Imaging Source Company, Germany) with
a resolution of 640 × 480 × 24 bits. The lens-attached (VT-LEM0618-
MP3, Vision Datum Technology Company, China) CCD had two options:
one for a normal field of view (12 mm) and the other for a relatively
small field of view (16 mm). Through several repeated experiments, we
found that samples of various sizes were all within the field of view
(FOV) when a 16 mm lens was used. Thus, the 16 mm option was se-
lected. Two online parameters were calculated based on two CCD
camera properties (Zhang et al., 2018), time of exposure (1/1542) and
transmission gain (11.23 db), to acquire clear images. Moreover, to
ensure that only one shrimp emerged in the FOV, we minimized the
shrimp loading speed and maximized the velocity of the conveyor belt.
Furthermore, we used spaced food-grade boards that were designed and
installed before the shrimp entered the lighting box. The actual shrimp
quality inspection line is depicted in Fig. 1. The schematic diagram of
the online quality inspection system for shrimp is presented in Fig. 2.
All the details of the operation of the shrimp classification machine
are depicted in Fig. 2. As the shrimp moved on the conveyor belt and
passed the sensor, the sensor was triggered immediately. After a short
Fig. 1. Actual shrimp quality inspection line.
Z. Liu, et al.
CCD
Light source
shrimp1 shrimp2 shrimp3
Conveyor system
Motion direction
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of the online quality inspection system.
delay, the CCD camera began to capture images, and a self-developed
program initiates. A single-chip AVR was used as the controller to open
or close the electromagnetic valves, which were connected to air noz-
zles. Based on the results of the image processing, the flawed shrimp
were ejected by the three air nozzles and the sound shrimp continued
moving with the conveyor belt and fell into the container at the end of
the conveyor belt. The first nozzle was used to remove the flawed
shrimp, the second nozzle was used to acquire large sound shrimp, and
the third nozzle was used to acquire small sound shrimp. Different
functions of the three air nozzles were implemented in the procedure,
depending on the requirements. The air-blowing approach was adopted
to minimize shrimp damage during the removal procedure.
Image acquisition and prepossessing algorithms were implemented
using the MATLAB programming language, version R2017a.
Subsequent DCNN construction and training algorithms were im-
plemented using Python (3.6.2) and the Deep Learning Toolbox Pytorch
(4.0.1). The computer platform was a computer server with an Intel
Core Xeon CPU 1.7 GHz, 32 GB memory, and three GTX 1050Ti (4G)
GPUs. The details of this system are shown in Fig. 2.
2.2. Shrimp image preprocessing and data augmentation
2.2.1. Shrimp image preprocessing
The shrimp image preprocessing included background segmenta-
tion, redundancy deletion, and image size normalization.
2.2.2. Background segmentation
Zihao et al. (2016a) presented a background segmentation algo-
rithm that was developed for shrimp, and this algorithm was used in
this study. The main process can be summarized by the following two
points. Firstly, the shrimp region of interest (ROI) was extracted based
on the difference between the object and background peaks in the
image histogram (Fig. 3b). Depending on this difference, the threshold
was obtained by averaging two peak values with the following equation
(Eq. (1.1)):
pk1 + pk 2
t=
2 (1.1)
where t represents the threshold, and pk1 and pk2 represent grey values
of the two peaks. If the grey value was less than the threshold, the pixel
value was set to 255 in the grey-level image; if the grey value was
greater than threshold, the pixel value was set to zero. After this
3
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926
IPC
Controller
Upper Air Nozzle
Lower Air Nozzle
manipulation, the grey image was similar to a structured binary image
(Fig. 3c). Secondly, the single-channel image was transmitted to a
three-channel image. Thus, all the x- and y-coordinates with pixel va-
lues of 255 in the single-channel image were recorded, and these co-
ordinate points in the original color image were set to 255. The ex-
tracted ROI shrimp image is shown in Fig. 3d. The whole process of
background segmentation is depicted in Fig. 3.
2.2.3. Redundancy deletion and image size normalization
Redundancy deletion is the process in which the portions of the
images acquired from the online equipment that contain no relevant
information are removed. Image size normalization is the process of
acquiring a standard rectangular image for adapting to the internal
structure of DCNNs. Redundancy deletion and image size normalization
involve three sequential processes. First, four margin coordinates (top,
bottom, left-most, and right-most) were computed based on the shrimp
background segmentation algorithm. Second, non-target areas in the
images were deleted, and ten pixels were retained from each margin, to
avoid shape descriptive overflow errors when using edge extraction
algorithm. Finally, a linear interpolation method was used to resize the
resulting images, and the final image was acquired with a size of
224 × 224 × 3. The processes of redundancy deletion and image nor-
malization are shown in Fig. 4. In this image, although the shape of the
shrimp image changed, the mathematical topological structure of the
original image’s internal structure was retained. Through the above
three steps, the original shrimp image of 640 × 480 × 3 (Fig. 3a) was
converted to 224 × 224 × 3 for the CNN network and the rectangular
image was transformed to a square shape. Fig. 5 displays parts of the
sample images in the nine classes after image preprocessing.
2.2.4. Data augmentation
Data augmentation technology has been adopted in many related
fields (Liu et al., 2016b; Nyawira Ishtar et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2018).
The construction of an original dataset in this work was necessary.
However, the number of original shrimp images that were acquired
from the online system was relatively small, only containing 1731
images overall in the nine classes (Table 1). This is not a large enough
set to train a DCNN with excellent performance. Moreover, to avoid
overfitting, a large-scale dataset was constructed, and the data aug-
mentation technique was developed. For each original image, an ad-
ditional 15 different images were expanded. These newly formed
images were created by rotating the images clockwise by seven
Z. Liu, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926

A Pixel
frequency
B

Pixel value

C D

Fig. 3. Background segmentation algorithm for shrimp image.

different angles (45°, 90°, 135°, 180°, 225°, 270°, and 315°), translating
the images in the lower left direction by 50 and 100 pixels, reflecting
the images to reverse the pixel order in each row and column, enlarging
the images by factors of 2.0, 4.0, and 0.5 using bi-cubic interpolation,
and down-sampling the images at intervals of 2. After several steps from
these image transformations, the dataset was augmented from 1731 to
27,696 images. As the original image set was manipulated, the pro-
portion of each shrimp class kept the same. A detailed sample dis-
tribution in each class is listed in Table 1
2.3. Proposed DCNN structure——ShrimpNet
2.3.1. ShrimpNet structure
The proposed architecture ShrimpNet was implemented and altered
based on the LeNet-5 structure (LeCun et al., 1998). This five-layer
network can be considered to be a self-learning process of local image
features from low to mid to high levels. The first two layers are called
convolutional layers (Conv1 and Conv2), and the high layers synthesize
complex and abstract structural information across the large-scale
sequences of convolutional layers. Interleaved with the max pooling
layers, these layers can capture deformable parts, and reduce the re-
solution of the convolutional outputs. The latter two fully connected
layers (FC3 and FC4) can capture complex co-occurrence statistics,
which drops semantics of spatial location. The combination layer was
developed by combining three types of single classifiers to strengthen
the feature expression ability. The final layer obtains a synthetic label
decision that is produced based on the end-to-end network feature map.
This architecture is appropriate for learning powerful local features
from the complex shrimp image dataset. The overall framework of
ShrimpNet is illustrated in Fig. 6.
The motivation for improving the small LeNet-5 architecture is il-
lustrated by the following two points.
(i) Strategies for sorting shrimp are sought such that the model can
execute in real-time and achieve rapid retraining by accepting new
samples. Therefore, models with few parameters and a simple net
structure that preserve good accuracy are necessary.
(ii) The dataset contains sound, defective and diseased shrimp. Their

need to delete right‐most 378x117x3

point
left‐most point top point Redundancy deleting
10 pixels

need
10 10 to Image size
need pix pix delete normalization
to els els
delete
10 pixels

need to delete bottom

point

224x224x3
640x480x3
Fig. 4. Process of redundancy deleting and image normalization.

4
Z. Liu, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926

framebuffer only saved one third of the DCNN parameters, providing

SS CR LAO
LATM LAT RD
RDT TM WF
Fig. 5. Parts of sample images in the nine classes after image preprocessing.
external appearances are complex. Although several human-de-
signed external features were developed, and some exploratory
processes were accomplished, high demands for accuracy and ef-
ficiency must still be improved. Therefore, the following question
was considered: What type of DCNN model can be used to improve
the performance and reduce the execution time?
2.3.2. Steps for developing smart networks
The innovations and main contributions of ShrimpNet are as fol-
lows.
Step1: Model chunking training parallelly in three pieces of
GPUs
Motivated by the design of the AlexNet structure (Krizhevsky et al.,
2017), the original LeNet-5 structure was expanded into three blocks of
parallel network structure lengthways (Fig. 6). The constructed net-
work was trained correspondingly in three GPU modules. In each
module, the convolutional stride sizes of 5 × 5, 3 × 3 and 1 × 1 were
integrated into the original LeNet-5 correspondingly. The Compute
Unified Device Architecture (CUDA) modules can speed up the training
process for the DCNN synchronously. Moreover, strong GPU computa-
tional capabilities are required to handle the tremendous matrix com-
putations when training a DCNN. The three GPUs were all NVIDIA GTX
1050Ti (4 GB) models. If only one GPU was used to train this smart
network and the GPU hardware design structure was not expanded, the
maximal scale of the parallel DCNN could be limited. Therefore, each
part of ShrimpNet was distributed into the GPUs, and each GPU
convenient communication for all the GPUs. Moreover, these GPUs had
mutual access to the framebuffer, and this process did not access the
host memory. ShrimpNet was designed to allow GPUs to communicate
only at certain layers of the network, controlling the performance loss
of communication. Thus, simultaneously using multiple GPUs to train
ShrimpNet was efficient.
Step2: Add 3 × 3 and 1 × 1 filters to the model
Motivated by the efficient convolutional kernel sizes (filters) design
of SqueezeNet (Forrest et al., 2016), 3 × 3 and 1 × 1 filters were added
to the original LeNet-5 model. Given the number of filters, the addition
of 1 × 1 and 3 × 3 filters mainly stemmed from the following two as-
pects: i) the network consisting of 1 × 1 and 3 × 3 filters had 25 and 3
times fewer parameters than the network only consisting of a 5 × 5
filter, respectively. Therefore, the quantity of the parameters decreased
while attempting to preserve accuracy; ii). Small filters are easily found
in internal subtle patterns, such as, texture and shape-related features
hidden in the deep part of images. The representation of these features
was important for increasing the recognition accuracy for certain types
of shrimp. Note that recognition accuracy was a key part of the con-
struction of ShrimpNet. Therefore, this strategy must be employed for
good shrimp classification.
Step3: Merge different convolutional strides in the convolu-
tional layers
Motivated by the design of the SqueezeNet structure (Forrest et al.,
2016), a DCNN structure was designed by integrating different con-
volutional strides into the three GPUs independently. When this process
was performed in each convolutional layer, the convolutional stride size
could have large impacts on the features learned by the DCNN. For
example, a large convolutional stride is prone to obtain image in-
formation, such as size, shape, and location. On the contrary, small
convolutional strides are prone to capture image information such as
color, texture, and image granularity (Forrest et al., 2016). These fac-
tors can serve as references to identify different types of shrimp, based
on the nine categories of samples provided by the dataset in this study.
Some types of shrimp have considerable differences in color and shape,
prompting the adoption of different convolutional strides to obtain a
precision classification rate.
Step4: Add combination classifier algorithm to the model
In the traditional structure of the DCNNs, the final classification
layer uses a single classifier as the label decision tool. The learned
features usually match with the internal structure of a certain classifier.
However, the decision made by the single classifier sometimes does not
reflect the comprehensive features of the samples. Therefore, the use of
a combination classifier strategy (Fumera et al., 2008) into the con-
structed model was developed. The classifier types involved support
vector machine (SVM) (Qiu et al., 2015), SoftMax (Jiang et al., 2018),
and Random Forest (Paul et al., 2018). We inserted these three types of
classifiers between FC4 and the final classification layer to complete the
combination processes based on the Improved Majority (IMAJ) rules.
Our team proposed the IMAJ algorithm in 2016 (Liu et al., 2016a). The
flow chart of IMAJ algorithm is displayed in Fig. 7.
This method was performed using a comprehensive decision
thought. It could produce a label decision using the new convolutional
features combined with the SVM, SoftMax, or Random Forest. The final
label decisions made by the IMAJ algorithm must be the same to ensure

Table 1
Number distribution of samples in old and new datasets.
Data style Nine different shrimp classes

CR LAO LAT LATM SS RD RDT TM WF

Label 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Before augmentation 134 123 222 80 565 126 116 80 285
After augmentation 2010 1845 3330 1200 8475 1890 1740 1200 4275

5
Z. Liu, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926

Stride:2 FC3 FC4

M
1x1 a
x Stride:2
1x1
Stride:5
p
3x3 o SVM
Stride:5
224x224x3 o M
Stride:9 3x3 a Softmax
l x
IMAJ Rule
5x5 i p
o Random forest
Fil
ter
s:6
n Stride:9
5x5
o
l
g i
Conv1 Filters:16 n
84 Combination 
120
g classifiers
Conv2
Full
connection Final label

Fig. 6. Overall framework of ShrimpNet architecture.

that the “minority is subordinate to the majority” for these produced
labels. The quintessence of the IMAJ algorithm lies in the final label
decision made by the “elite votes” instead of “all votes”. By using the
IMAJ algorithm, a few advantaged votes that contribute to the final
accuracy can be retained, whereas other disadvantaged votes that de-
crease the final accuracy can be deleted. Through the previous four
steps, the ShrimpNet model was constructed.
Step5: Adjust ShrimpNet to find optimal network structure
The objective of this step is similar to Step 2. From a practical point
of view, Step 5 allows the shrimp sorting applications to confirm that
the model can execute in real-time and continually refresh by accepting
new samples. Moreover, the changing strategies of the net structures
were also investigated in the overall architecture in this step. Such
strategies can enable fast running times with small effects. The per-
formance and corresponding running time of this model were analyzed
by shrinking its depth (number of layers) and width (filters in each
layer) until an optimal net structure was found.
Step6: Add dropout techniques to ShrimpNet
Hinton et al. (2012) proposed a dropout technique, which was
mainly used to randomly delete some superfluous neurons, thereby
preventing overfitting when training the DCNN. By adding this tech-
nology, the generalized performance of ShrimpNet could be enhanced
to a certain extent. In ShrimpNet, the two fully connected layers (FC3,
FC4) employed dropout techniques.
The specific details of ShrimpNet were analyzed by calculating the
number of parameters in each layer, thereby computing the output
image size and understanding the depth and width of ShrimpNet. The
input of the 224 × 224 × 3 original images was preprocessed. We
assumed that the number of local receptive fields in the Conv1 layer
was six, whereas that of local receptive fields in the Conv2 layer was 16.
The input number of the neuron node in the first fully connected layers
were 120 (FC3), whereas that of the neuron node in the second fully
connected layers was 84 (FC4). We also supposed that the input para-
meters were (N, Cin, Hin, Win), whereas the output parameters were (N,
Cout, Hout, Wout), where N denotes the batch size, C denotes the number
of channels, H denotes the height in image pixels, and W is the width in
image pixels. The output image size can be depicted using the following
equations (Eqs. (1.2) and (1.3)):
Hout
Hin + 2 × padding [0] − dilation [0] × (kernel _size [0] − 1) − 1
= +1
stride [0]
(1.2)
Wout
Win + 2 × padding [1] − dilation [1] × (kernel _size [1] − 1) − 1
= +1
stride [1]
(1.3)
where padding controls the amount of implicit zero-padding on both
sides for the padding number of points for each dimension, and padding
[0] and padding[1] represent the x- and y-coordinate padding amounts,
respectively. dilation controls the spacing between the kernel points,
dilation[0] and dilation[1] represent the x- and y-coordinate dilations,
respectively. kernel_size indicates the number of filters in each con-
volutional layer, and kernel_size[0] and kernel_size[1] represent x- and y-
coordinate filter amounts, respectively. The padding, dilation, kernel_size,

K1 classifiers K2 features

K1 K2 misclassification rates(MR)
Recall to find corresponding
Renew MR from L1 classifiers and L2 features
small to large L1 classifiers L2 features
Majority votes
MR set contains K1 K2 values
Final label
Selected the top-rank
L1×L2 (L1 K1, L2 K2)

New MR set contains L1×L2 values

Fig. 7. Flowchart of IMAJ algorithm.

6
Z. Liu, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926

Table 2 Validation 10-4

Parameter design and computation from ShrimpNet. accuracy 10-3
10-5
Validation
CNNs layers GPU parallel distribution training CNNs structure accuracy

Output size Filters size/strides Total parameters

Conv1 Conv11 56 × 56 × 6 1 × 1/2 18,816

Conv12 23 × 23 × 6 3 × 3/5 3147
Conv13 13 × 13 × 6 5 × 5/9 1014

Conv2 Conv21 28 × 28 × 16 1 × 1/2 12,544

Conv22 2 × 2 × 16 3 × 3/5 64
Conv23 1 × 1 × 16 5 × 5/9 16

FC3 FC31 28 × 28 × 16 × 120 \ 1,505,280

FC32 2 × 2 × 16 × 120 \ 7680
FC33 1 × 1 × 16 × 120 \ 1920

FC4 FC41 120 × 84 \ 10,080 0.01 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.99
FC42 120 × 84 \ 10,080 Dropout ratio
FC43 120 × 84 \ 10,080
Fig. 9. Effects of dropout ratio on validation accuracy.

Hin and Win were all known in advance. Therefore, the output size for
each image could be solved. The computed results are summarized in
Table 2.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Hyper-parameter optimization of ShrimpNet
Hyper-parameters include the learning rate, dropout ratio, batch-
size, number of convolutional kernels, and convolutional kernel size.
The first three parameters are analyzed in this section, while the latter
two parameters are analyzed in next section.
The learning rate controls the convergence speed of the DCNN
model, indicating that the models finished training, while the loss
function converged to a steady state. A high learning rate results in
rapid convergence, whereas a low learning rate results in slow con-
vergence. Based on a contrast experiment, a learning rate of 10-4 was
selected, as shown in Fig. 8.
Dropout is a powerful technique to address this issue when data are
limited. This process removed the net units with a fixed probability in
the training stage, using the whole architecture at test time. In this
experiment, the effect of varying this hyper-parameter was explored
from 0.01 to 0.99, which is the generally recommended range (Wu
et al., 2018). As shown in Fig. 9, the network performed well at 0.8.
The batch-size is the number of samples that are input into the
networks when training the model. Two concepts were introduced to
optimize the batch-size: the rising speed ratio of training accuracy
(TADSR) and descending speed ratio of training loss (TLDSR). The two
indexes were calculated using following two equations (Eqs. (1.4) and
(1.5)):
0.0004 0.0003 0.0005
Validation
0.1
accuracy
Validation
accuracy
0.6
initialacc − steadyacc
TADSR = × 100%
initialacc (1.4)
initialloss − steadyloss
TLDSR = × 100%
initialloss (1.5)
where initialacc is the initial value of the training accuracy, and steadyacc
is the final accuracy value when the model is at steady state. Similarly,
initialloss is the initial value of the training loss, and steadyloss is the final
loss value when the model is at steady state. Fig. 10 illustrates the
comparison results with different batch-size values. As the batch-size
increased, the two indices simultaneously increased and became nearly
flat when the batch-size increased to 200 and 256. Both values could
optimize the model. Considering that large batch-size may result in
memory collapses, 200 was selected.
3.2. Model exploration in different architectures of ShrimpNet
ShrimpNet was varied to explore the better-performing sub-models
by adjusting the sizes of the layers or removing a certain layer. The run-
time and accuracy of the overall architecture of ShrimpNet were first
explored by completely removing each layer. Table 3 shows the impact
of changing the overall architecture on the performance and runtime.
The abbreviation TLDT in Table 3 is the training loss descend time. A
smaller TLDT corresponds to a faster and more efficient modeling
process.
In each case, the model was independently trained from scratch
with the revised architecture. Removing the fully connected layers of
FC3 and FC4 (called ShrimpNet-3) simultaneously or deleting one of
TADSR
or
TLDSR
Train loss
minimum

0.002

Optimal
1.8
scope

0.09

10-1 10-2 10-3 10-4 10-5 10-6 10-7 10-8 8 16 32 64 150 200 256
Learning rate Batch-size
Fig. 8. Effects of learning rate on validation accuracy and minimum train loss. Fig. 10. Effects of batch-size on TLDSR and TADSR.

7
Z. Liu, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926

Table 3
Effects of changing the overall architecture of ShrimpNet (bold vales in this Table represent the better experimental results).
Type Index Architectural change TLDSR (%) TLDT (h) Training time(h) Validation accuracy

1 Only retain Conv1 99.60% 0.49 0.43 84.70%

2 Overall ShrimpNet 99.86% 0.5 0.65 97.92%
3 Remove Conv2 + Pooling2 99.86% 0.54 0.58 85.79%
4 Remove Pooling1 + Pooling2 99.92% 0.48 0.60 91.45%
5 Remove Pooling2 99.1% 0.51 0.56 94.53%
6 Remove Pooling1 99.65% 0.53 0.61 94.70%
7 Remove FC3 96.51% 0.51 0.52 92.43%
8 Remove FC4 97.26% 0.46 0.53 93.23%
9 Remove FC3,FC4 99.94% 0.41 0.47 96.84%
10 Adjust layers Conv1,2 96.16% 0.43 0.56 86.36%
4,12filters
11 Adjust layers Conv1,2 98.96% 0.58 0.65 95.67%
32,64filters + dropout
12 Adjust layers Conv1,2 98.66% 0.76 0.81 96.53%
64,128filters + dropout
13 Adjust layers Conv1,2 97.26% 0.69 0.99 97.19%
128,256filters + dropout
14 Adjust layers Conv1,2 97.18% 0.72 1.17 97.23%
256,512filters + dropout

them only yielded a slight decrease in accuracy. This result is sur-
prising, since these layers contain most of the model parameters. This
adjustment can reduce the computation cost and burden with only a
slight accuracy loss. Removing two of the pooling layers (Pooling1-2)
simultaneously or deleting one of them also yielded a relatively small
difference in the final accuracy. However, only retaining the Conv1
layer or removing the Conv2 layer and Pooling2 layer simultaneously
yielded a poor performance. Therefore, the convolutional layers were
important for obtaining good performance. The convolutional kernel
sizes of the Conv1 and Conv2 layers in ShrimpNet were modified, and
the results are provided in Table 3 (No. 10-14). These results indicate
that increasing the convolutional kernel sizes of the Conv1 and Conv2
layers only provided a benefit for the model training performance. Such
an increase also enlarged the scale of the fully connected layers, in-
troducing an over-fitting issue. Thus, the dropout technology was added
into ShrimpNet. In this contribution, this sub-model in which the FC3
and FC4 layers were removed (No. 9) was selected as the optimized
model based on the smallest training time and best validation accuracy.
Efficient feature self-learning is the kernel of ShrimpNet, and it is
also the main reason that high performance was achieved. Moreover,
the design of the two convolutional layers and the latter fully connected
layers fulfill an essential role in contributing to the recognition rate. In
the first convolutional layer (Conv1), the network can learn the key
feature points and the obvious regions on the surface of the shrimp,
including shrimp eyes, spots on the abdomen, tiny dots on the maxilla
and uropod. In the second convolutional layer (Conv2), the edge related
information consisting of pixel feature points could be learned in the
shrimp image, including the profile shape on the abdomen, parts of the
cephalothorax, and parts of the carapace. Many object feature differ-
ences between sound shrimp and other diseased or defective shrimp
were detected in these two fully connected layers (FC3-4), including the
subtle textural difference on the surface of the shrimp, the rostrum
difference in the morphology, and the glossiness on the surface of
shrimp. The hidden feature could be used to recognize real shrimp
samples in ShrimpNet.
3.3. Confusion matrix for shrimp recognition
Table 4 was created to investigate how frequently the proposed
method identifies “dirty” shrimp as sound shrimp incorrectly. In
Table 4, the evaluation indices time and accuracy, correspondingly
represent the recognition time per shrimp and total validation accuracy.
From Table 4, the LAT class had the lowest validation accuracy (87.5%)
among all nine classes. The reason is that there was a high similarity in
the external appearances of the SS and LAT classes. Moreover, the
percentage of incorrectly classifying LATs as SS samples accounted for
88.66% in the overall misclassified samples of LAT class. In this situa-
tion, LAT is a class that only lacks a part of the tail, which cannot cause
pollution to sound shrimp clusters. Moreover, as shown in Table 4, no
diseased or polluted shrimp classes were incorrectly graded into the
sound shrimp class, which was an objective of this study.
3.4. Performance comparison between combination and individual classifier
Table 5 shows the performance of the combination layer in
ShrimpNet under different classifier combinations, confirming that the
classifier combination schemes could achieve relatively high validation
accuracy. However, the training time was not optimal, because the
combination processes spend time merging these three single classifiers
together. After this experiment, we confirmed that using ShrimpNet-
SoftMax required the least time, but its accuracy was not optimal. Thus,
there is a tradeoff between time consumption and accuracy, and the
optimal combination must be selected based on the actual application
requirements. The final classification layer of traditional structure of a
DCNN commonly uses a single classifier as the label decision tool.
However, the decision made by the single classifier sometimes cannot
present the comprehensive features of the shrimp samples. Therefore,
the use of a combination classifier strategy is a key factor in acquiring
high performance.
3.5. Performance comparison with other sophisticated DCNN
The proposed method was compared with other sophisticated
DCNNs. The results were obtained on the same computational system
and are summarized in Table 6. However, the system operation time
evidently differed based on the depth of the DCNNs. For example,
training the deep model DenseNet consisting of 121 layers with an
acquisition accuracy of 99.81% required more than half of a day. Given
that most parameters accumulated in the FC3 and FC4 layers of
ShrimpNet, manipulations should be performed to free the memory
space. Thus, strategies of deleting the two fully connected layers were
developed to form ShrimpNet-3. This strategy involved judiciously
decreasing the quantity of parameters from 254.6 to 9.7, attempting to
preserve accuracy as much as possible. This step could improve the
operation efficiency of the system using ShrimpNet. Although the ac-
curacy of ShrimpNet is not surprising, this accuracy level for agriculture
recognition is completely acceptable. The advantages of ShrimpNet-3
are mainly in its improved algorithm execution time and model scale.

8
Z. Liu, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926

Table 4
Confusion matrix for shrimp clasification (bold vales in this Table represent the numbers of being correctly classified).
Testing stage Nine different shrimp classes

CR LAO LAT LATM SS RD RDT TM WF

CR 1073 3 4 5 0 0 0 7 0
LAO 0 986 7 2 0 0 0 8 0
LAT 16 2 1436 4 172 0 0 11 0
LATM 0 5 13 637 0 0 0 13 0
SS 0 6 64 0 4441 0 0 2 0
RD 1 1 0 0 0 1009 25 0 0
RDT 0 0 0 0 0 9 934 0 0
TM 8 2 5 4 0 0 0 641 0
WF 0 0 0 0 7 5 0 0 2280

Time (ms) 19.56 23.16 24.18 16.34 26.42 21.29 19.29 22.7 32.98
Accuracy (%) 98.3 98.3 87.5 95.4 98.4 97.4 99.1 97.1 99.5

Table 5 Table 7
Comparison between combination and single classifiers (bold vales in this Table Accuracy comparison of ShrimpNet with other shrimp recognition methods
represent the better experimental results). (bold vales in this Table represent the better experimental results).
Classifier choices Evaluation indexes Feature representations Classifiers Validation accuracy

Training time (h) Validation accuracy (%) ECO features (Zhang et al., 2014b) AdaBoost 95.1%
TADA features (Lee et al., 2012) Threshold settings 92.4%
ShrimpNet-SVM 0.63 93.34% Segmentation features (Hanmei, Neural networks 93.33%
ShrimpNet-SoftMax 0.59 92.52% 2015)
ShrimpNet-Random Forest 0.61 94.13% Shape features (Wei, 2018) K-Nearest Neighbor 86.4%
ShrimpNet-Combination 0.65 96.92% Combination features (Liu et al., Combination rules 92.7%
2016a)
Iterations features (Zihao et al., Threshold settings 94.34%
2016b)
Table 6
ShrimpNet-3 Combination rules 96.84%
Performance comparison of different DCNN constructions with the proposed
ShrimpNet (bold vales in this Table represent the better experimental results).
DCNN type Memory requirement/MB Total time (h) Accuracy (%) constructing DCNN features, the end-to-end strategy of ShrimpNet-3
allows convenient and rapid model construction. Moreover, this model
Model size Data flow
exhibited better validation accuracy than the other shrimp recognition
LeNet 109.6 4.2 1.06 95.92% methods. Specifically, the accuracy of ShrimpNet-3 increased 1.74%
AlexNet 254.6 5.4 2.09 98.31% and 10.44% compared to ShrimpNet for the best (95.1%) and the worst
VGGNet (11) 397.6 48.7 3.41 98.44% (86.4%) accuracies. Moreover, the average validation accuracy value of
SqueezeNet 198.4 8.6 1.54 92.46%
the six traditional methods was 92.38%, which is 4.46% lower than that
GoogleNet (v3) 598.3 99.8 7.31 97.44%
ResNet (50) 869.4 102.3 13.52 99.67% of ShrimpNet-3. These results demonstrate the superiority of the pro-
ResNet (101) 1769.6 165.1 15.00 99.82% posed algorithm.
DenseNet (121) 2894.7 234.8 17.87 99.81% Therefore, this preliminary study served as a proof-of-concept that
ShrimpNet 288.3 6.5 1.01 97.92% the DCNN combined with fusion classifier strategies can be used to
ShrimpNet-3 9.7 3.2 0.7 96.84%
effectively assess shrimp quality. However, further studies must be
performed to scale up the implementation of such tools. A shrimp
The two indices were lower than those of other sophisticated DCNNs quality evaluation model should be built using various shrimp classes
from Table 6. ShrimpNet-3 achieved a 96.84% accuracy with a 9.7 M arising from different geographic regions. Longer experimental win-
model size and 3.2 M data flow. In addition, its model scale was small, dows would also allow the creation of large datasets and robust
nearly 298 and 182 times smaller than DenseNet (121) and ResNet mathematical models, which should be well generalized for additional
(101), respectively. These results demonstrate the superiority of the shrimp classes and evaluation conditions.
proposed algorithm.
4. Conclusions

3.6. Performance comparison with other shrimp recognition methods
In this research, we compared ShrimpNet to other shrimp recogni-
tion methods. The results are shown in Table 7. Searching for the dif-
ferences in the external appearances of the shrimp classes is tradition-
ally achieved by the human eye. However, converting human
experience to a machine vision algorithm using machine language is the
mainstream and full-automatic method to evaluate shrimp quality.
Therefore, for the results presented in Table 7, the feature extraction
methods mainly depend on elaborate and complex mathematical
models, which is crucial for improving the validation accuracy. How-
ever, the process of seeking the best sorting strategies based on human
experience requires considerable amounts of time. During the process of
In this study, the effectiveness of the proposed ShrimpNet was de-
monstrated by recognizing shrimp in industrial images. ShrimpNet was
proposed based on a standard dataset using image augmentation
technology to train a DCNN. After augmentation, this dataset achieved
an unprecedented scale and was significantly enriched for the variation
of each species, allowing the construction of a powerful DCNN for
shrimp classification. Certain results were obtained during the off-line
modeling process, and the accuracy of ShrimpNet was comparatively
high in the field of agricultural product recognition. However, this re-
search suggested that the application of this method to recognize
shrimp online is promising and efficient. The constructed ShrimpNet-3
had a small model size (9.7 M) and small parameter flow (3.2 M).
Moreover, with a tiny network structure and trained model parameters,

9
Z. Liu, et al.
ShrimpNet-3 can be used in online classification for rapid judgment and
decision making.
The pipeline of classification was not used previously, and thus, this
paper is the first to report this method for the shrimp classification task.
This approach can be improved further as follows. (i) Including fine
method improvements for discerning the LAT class that may decrease
the total validation accuracy. (ii) Expanding the dataset to include
additional significant species in the future. (iii) Implementing online
learning to use unlabeled new shrimp samples in the online industry for
updating the model parameters in real-time. (iv) An unsupervised ma-
chine learning algorithm should be used to reduce human intervention
during the training process. (v) Interpreting overlapping shrimp clus-
ters, which remains a great challenge.
Acknowledgement & Funding
This work was financially supported by the Scientific Research
Foundation of Jiaxing University, the city public welfare technology
application research project of Jiaxing Science and Technology Bureau
(No. 2018AY11008), the National Social Science Funds (No.
18ZDA079), 2019 Active Design Projects of Key R&D Plans of Zhejiang
Province (No. 2019C01128) and 2019 Projects on Public Welfare
Technology Research of Zhejiang Province (No. LGF19G030004). We
thank LetPub for its linguistic assistance during the preparation of this
manuscript.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Ethical approval
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guide-
lines for the care and use of animals were followed.
Informed consent
Not applicable.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2019.104926.
References
Arendse, E., Fawole, O.A., Opara, U.L., 2015. Discrimination of pomegranate fruit quality
by instrumental and sensory measurements during storage at three temperature re-
gimes. J. Food Process. Preserv. 39 (6), 1867–1877.
Arun, P.V., Buddhiraju, K.M., Porwal, A., 2018. CNN based sub-pixel mapping for hy-
perspectral images. Neurocomputing 311, 51–64.
Banerjee, S., Das, S., 2018. Mutual variation of information on transfer-CNN for face
recognition with degraded probe samples. Neurocomputing 310, 299–315.
Blasco, J., Munera, S., Aleixos, N., Cubero, S., Molto, E., 2017. Machine vision-based
measurement systems for fruit and vegetable quality control in postharvest. Meas.
Model. Autom. Adv. Food Process. 161, 71–91.
Borresen, T., 2018. Improving seafood safety and quality. J. Aquat. Food Prod. Technol.
27 (5), 543.
Chakraborty, D., Dutta, O., Sarkar, A., Ghoshal, S., Saha, S., 2014. Linear discriminant
analysis based indian fruit juice classification using NIR spectrometry data. In: 5th
International Conference Confluence the Next Generation Information Technology
Summit (Confluence), pp. 144–148.
Dong, Z., Jia, S., Wu, T., Pei, M., et al., 2016. Face video retrieval via deep learning of
binary hash representations. In: Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on
Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-16).
Fernandez-Lozano, C., Canto, C., Gestal, M., Andrade-Garda, J.M., Rabunal, J.R., Dorado,
J., Pazos, A., 2013. Hybrid model based on genetic algorithms and SVM applied to
variable selection within fruit juice classification. Sci. World J.
Forrest, N.L., Song, H., Matthew, W.M., Khalid, A., William, J.D., Kurt, K., 2016.
SqueezeNet: AlexNet-level accuracy with 50x fewer parameters and < 0.5MB model
size. Proceedings of the Conference Name|, Conference Location|.
10
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 165 (2019) 104926
Fuentes, M., Baigorri, R., Gonzalez-Gaitano, G., Garcia-Mina, J.M., 2018. New metho-
dology to assess the quantity and quality of humic substances in organic materials
and commercial products for agriculture. J. Soils Sedim. 18 (4), 1389–1399.
Fumera, G., Roli, F., Serrau, A., 2008. A theoretical analysis of bagging as a linear
combination of classifiers. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 30 (7), 1293–1299.
Hanmei, H., 2015. Research of melanotic cooked shrimp recognition method using ma-
chine vision. In: School of Biosystems Engineering and Food Science. Zhejiang
University, pp. 137.
Harbitz, A., 2007. Estimation of shrimp (Pandalus borealis) carapace length by image
analysis. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 64 (5), 939–944.
Hassoun, A., Karoui, R., 2017. Quality evaluation of fish and other seafood by traditional
and nondestructive instrumental methods: Advantages and limitations. Crit. Rev.
Food Sci. Nutrit. 57 (9), 1976–1998.
Hinton, G.E., Srivastava, N., Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., Salakhutdinov, R.R., 2012.
Improving neural networks by preventing co-adaptation of feature detectors.
Comput. Sci. 3 (4), 212–223.
Jiang, M.Y., Liang, Y.C., Feng, X.Y., Fan, X.J., Pei, Z.L., Xue, Y., Guan, R.C., 2018. Text
classification based on deep belief network and softmax regression. Neural Comput.
Appl. 29 (1), 61–70.
Kim, H.W., Hong, Y.J., Jo, J.I., Ha, S.D., Kim, S.H., Lee, H.J., Rhee, M.S., 2017. Raw
ready-to-eat seafood safety: microbiological quality of the various seafood species
available in fishery, hyper and online markets. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 64 (1), 27–34.
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., Hinton, G.E., 2017. ImageNet classification with deep
convolutional neural networks. Commun. ACM 60 (6), 84–90.
LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., Haffner, P., 1998. Gradient-based learning applied to
document recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE.
Lee, D.J., Xiong, G.M., Lane, R.M., Zhang, D., 2012. An efficient shape analysis method
for shrimp quality evaluation. In: 12th International Conference on Control,
Automation, Robotics & Vision (ICARCV), pp. 865–870.
Li, S., Song, W.F., Qin, H., Hao, A.M., 2018. Deep variance network: An iterative, im-
proved CNN framework for unbalanced training datasets. Pattern Recogn. 81,
294–308.
Liu, Z., Cheng, F., Hong, H., 2016a. Identification of impurities in fresh shrimp using
improved majority scheme-based classifier. Food Anal. Methods.
Liu, Z.Y., Gao, J.F., Yang, G.G., Zhang, H., He, Y., 2016b. Localization and classification of
paddy field pests using a saliency map and deep convolutional neural network. Sci.
Rep. 6.
Ni, C., Wang, D.Y., Vinson, R., Holmes, M., Tao, Y., 2019. Automatic inspection machine
for maize kernels based on deep convolutional neural networks. Biosyst. Eng. 178,
131–144.
Nicolai, B.M., Defraeye, T., De Ketelaere, B., Herremans, E., Hertog, M.L.A.T.M., Saeys,
W., Torricelli, A., Vandendriessche, T., Verboven, P., 2014. Nondestructive mea-
surement of fruit and vegetable quality. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 5 (5),
285–312.
Nyawira Ishtar, B.K., Iris, Qian, Annie, Zhang, 2018. Understanding neural pathways in
zebrafish through deep learning and high resolution electron microscope data.
Proceedings of the Conference Name|, Conference Location|.
Paul, A., Mukherjee, D.P., Das, P., Gangopadhyay, A., Chintha, A.R., Kundu, S., 2018.
Improved random forest for classification. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 27 (8),
4012–4024.
Pu, Y.Y., Feng, Y.Z., Sun, D.W., 2015. Recent progress of hyperspectral imaging on quality
and safety inspection of fruits and vegetables: a review. Compreh. Rev. Food Sci.
Food Saf. 14 (2), 176–188.
Qiu, S.S., Gao, L.P., Wang, J., 2015. Classification and regression of ELM, LVQ and SVM
for E-nose data of strawberry juice. J. Food Eng. 144, 77–85.
Wang, S.H., Lv, Y.D., Sui, Y.X., Liu, S., Wang, S.J., Zhang, Y.D., 2018. Alcoholism de-
tection by data augmentation and convolutional neural network with stochastic
pooling. J. Med. Syst. 42 (1).
Wei, Z., 2018. Study of online identification and elimination system for incomplete
shrimp based on machine vision technology. School of Biosystems Engineering and
Food Science. Zhejiang University p. 89.
Wu, X., He, R., Sun, Z.N., Tan, T.N., 2018. A light CNN for deep face representation with
noisy labels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forens. Secur. 13 (11), 2884–2896.
Zhang, L., Dong, W., Zhang, D., Shi, G., et al., 2010. Two-stage image denoising by
principal component analysis with local pixel grouping. Pattern Recogn.
Zhang, B.H., Li, J.B., Fan, S.X., Huang, W.Q., Zhang, C., Wang, Q.Y., Xiao, G.D., 2014a.
Principles and applications of hyperspectral imaging technique in quality and safety
inspection of fruits and vegetables. Spectrosc. Spectral Anal. 34 (10), 2743–2751.
Zhang, D., Lillywhite, K.D., Lee, D.J., Tippetts, B.J., 2014b. Automatic shrimp shape
grading using evolution constructed features. Comput. Electron. Agric. 100, 116–122.
Zhang, Y., Wang, G.Y., Xu, J.T., 2018. Parameter estimation of signal-dependent random
noise in CMOS/CCD image sensor based on numerical characteristic of mixed poisson
noise samples. Sensors 18 (7).
Zhang, Y.D., Wu, L.A., Wang, S.H., Ji, G.L., 2015. Comment on ‘Principles, developments
and applications of computer vision for external quality inspection of fruits and ve-
getables: a review (Food Research International; 2014, 62: 326–343)’. Food Res. Int.
70, 142.
Zhao, J.F., Mao, X., Chen, L.J., 2019. Speech emotion recognition using deep 1D & 2D
CNN LSTM networks. Biomed. Signal Process. Control 47, 312–323.
Zihao, L., Fang, C., Wei, Z., 2017. Recognition-based image segmentation of touching
pairs of cooked shrimp (Penaeus Orientalis) using improved pruning algorithm for
quality measurement. J. Food Eng. 195, 1–16.
Zihao, L., Fang, C., Zhang, W., 2016a. A novel segmentation algorithm for clustered
flexional agricultural products based on image analysis. Comput. Electron. Agric.
126, 44–54.
Zihao, L., Fang, C., Zhaoyong, G., Zhaohong, Y., Mingchuan, Z., Junfeng, G., 2016b. An
automatic system for eliminating shrimp impurities using iteration algorithm. Int.
Agric. Eng. J. 4.