Machine Learning Techniques to Select a Reduced and Optimal Set of Sensors for the Design of Ad Hoc Sensory Systems
The first step of this research has been to discriminate, by means of a commercial electronic nose (e-nose), the maturity evolution of seven types of fruits stored in refrigerated cells, from the post-harvest period till the beginning of the marcescence. The final aim was to determine a procedure to select a reduced set of sensors that can be efficiently used to monitor the same class of fruits by a low cost system with few, suitable sensors without loss in accuracy and generalization. To define the best subset we have compared the use of a projection technique (the Principal Component Analysis, PCA) with the sequential feature selection technique (Sequential Forward Selection, SFS) and the Genetic Algorithm (GA) technique by using classification schemes like Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) and k-Nearest Neighbor (kNN) and applying two data pre-processing methods. We have determined a subset of only three sensors which gives a classification accuracy near 100%. This procedure can be generalized to other experimental situations to select a minimal and optimal set of sensors to be used in consumer applications for the design of ad hoc sensory systems.
KeywordsSensors selection Classification algorithms Electronic nose Fruit monitoring PCA
This work has been partially funded by Italian Ministry of Economic Development thanks to “Ricerca di Sistema elettrico”, “ORTOFRULOG”, and “Magazzino Viag-giante” projects. The authors are thankful to Paolo di Lorenzo for his support in the experimental campaigns.
- 8.Butler, H.J., Ashton, L., Bird, B., Cinque, G., Curtis, K., Dorney, J., Esmonde-White, K., Fullwood, N.J., Gardner, B., Martin-Hirsch, P.L., Walsh, M.J., McAinsh, M.R., Stone, N., Martin, F.L.: Using Raman spectroscopy to characterize biological materials. Nat. Protoc. 11, 664–687 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2016.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Benedetti, S., Buratti, S., Spinardi, A., Mannino, S., Mignani, I.: Electronic nose as a non-destructive tool to characterise peach cultivars and to monitor their ripening stage during shelf-life. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 47, 181–188 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2007.06.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Rizzolo, A., Bianchi, G., Vanoli, M., Lurie, S., Spinelli, L., Torricelli, A.: Electronic nose to detect volatile compound profile and quality changes in ‘Spring Belle’ peach (Prunus persica L.) during cold storage in relation to fruit optical properties measured by time-resolved reflectance spectroscopy. J. Agric. Food Chem. 61, 1671–1685 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1021/jf302808gCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Lavine, B.K.: Chemometrics: clustering and classification of analytical data. In: Encyclopedia of Analytical Chemistry, pp. 1–21. Wiley, Chichester (2000)Google Scholar
- 23.The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
- 29.Pardo, A., Marco, S., Calaza, C., Ortega, A., Perera, A., Sundic, T., Samitier, J.: Methods for sensor selection in pattern recognition. In: Gardner, J.W., Persaud, K.C. (eds.) Electronic Noses and Olfaction, pp. 83–88. IoP Publishing, Bristol (2000)Google Scholar
- 30.Chipperfield, A., Fleming, P., Pohlheim, H., Fonseca, C.: Genetic algorithm toolbox for use with MATLAB, Free Computer Programs on the Website of the Department of Automatic Control and Systems Engineering, University of Sheffield (1994)Google Scholar