Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, Volume. 58, Issue 3, 3300041(2021)
Classification of Handkerchief Paper Brand Based on Spectral Data Fusion Technology
Figures & Tables(9)
Fig. 3. Trend chart of classification accuracy of 8 brands of handkerchief paper in different dimensions
Fig. 4. Classification accuracy of 14 series of Xinxiangyin handkerchiefs in different dimensions
Table 1.
LDA accuracy, recall rate and false positive rate of two spectra View tableTable 1.
LDA accuracy, recall rate and false positive rate of two spectra Brand Infrared spectrum Raman spectrum Accuracy/% Recall/% False positive/% Accuracy/% Recall/% False positive/% QF 92.1 66.7 5.3 96.8 66.7 0 SJ 85.7 66.7 11.1 98.4 88.9 0 WD 92.1 66.7 2.0 88.9 66.7 5.9 XBB 92.1 55.6 1.9 93.7 77.8 3.7 XS 90.5 83.3 8.8 93.7 83.3 5.3 XXY 92.1 77.8 5.6 90.5 77.8 7.4 XZL 93.7 66.7 3.5 98.4 83.3 0.0 YR 92.1 33.3 1.8 98.4 100 1.8
Table 2.
LDA accuracy, recall rate and false positive rate after spectral fusion View tableTable 2.
LDA accuracy, recall rate and false positive rate after spectral fusion Brand Accuracy/% Recall/% False positive/% QF 98.4 83.3 0 SJ 98.4 88.9 0 WD 92.1 75.0 3.9 XBB 95.2 88.9 3.7 XS 95.2 83.3 3.5 XXY 93.7 88.9 5.6 XZL 98.4 83.3 0 YR 96.8 83.3 1.8
Table 3.
Characteristic variance contribution rate of PCA View tableTable 3.
Characteristic variance contribution rate of PCA Component Eigenvalue Variance/% Cumulative variance/% Component Eigenvalue Variance/% Cumulative variance/% PC1 437.789 48.162 48.162 PC20 2.176 0.239 96.066 PC2 231.312 25.447 73.608 PC21 2.096 0.231 96.297 PC3 90.879 9.998 83.606 PC22 2.023 0.223 96.520 PC4 26.028 2.863 86.470 PC23 1.918 0.211 96.731 PC5 21.176 2.330 88.799 PC24 1.786 0.196 96.927 PC6 11.269 1.240 90.039 PC25 1.702 0.187 97.114 PC7 8.257 0.908 90.947 PC26 1.587 0.175 97.289 PC8 6.497 0.715 91.662 PC27 1.481 0.163 97.452 PC9 5.023 0.553 92.215 PC28 1.425 0.157 97.609 PC10 4.111 0.452 92.667 PC29 1.382 0.152 97.761 PC11 4.000 0.440 93.107 PC30 1.289 0.142 97.902 PC12 3.757 0.413 93.520 PC31 1.252 0.138 98.040 PC13 3.719 0.409 93.929 PC32 1.183 0.130 98.170 PC14 3.475 0.382 94.311 PC33 1.154 0.127 98.297 PC15 3.178 0.350 94.661 PC34 1.089 0.12 98.417 PC16 3.035 0.334 94.995 PC35 1.024 0.113 98.530 PC17 2.756 0.303 95.298 PC36 0.952 0.105 98.634 PC18 2.507 0.276 95.574 PC37 0.914 0.101 98.735 PC19 2.300 0.253 95.827
Table 4.
Accuracy of LDA in different dimensions View tableTable 4.
Accuracy of LDA in different dimensions Dimension Precision/% Overall accuracy/% QF SJ WD XS XBB XXY XZL YR 2 50.0 11.1 0 55.6 33.3 11.1 66.7 0 25.4 3 83.3 55.6 8.3 44.4 66.7 33.3 66.7 16.7 42.9 4 83.3 66.7 16.7 44.4 66.7 33.3 66.7 16.7 46.0 5 83.3 44.4 33.3 55.6 66.7 44.4 66.7 16.7 49.2 6 83.3 33.3 25.0 55.6 66.7 55.6 83.3 33.3 50.8 7 83.3 33.3 50.0 66.7 66.7 66.7 83.3 33.3 58.7 8 83.3 44.4 50.0 77.8 66.7 66.7 83.3 33.3 61.9 9 83.3 44.4 58.3 77.8 66.7 66.7 83.3 33.3 63.5 10 83.3 55.6 58.3 77.8 83.3 66.7 83.3 50.0 68.3 11 100 66.7 58.3 77.8 100 66.7 66.7 66.7 73.0 12 100 44.4 50.0 66.7 100 77.8 66.7 66.7 68.3 13 100 44.4 66.7 66.7 100 100 66.7 83.3 76.2 14 83.3 66.7 66.7 77.8 83.3 100 66.7 66.7 76.2 15 83.3 66.7 75.0 77.8 83.3 100 66.7 66.7 77.8 16 83.3 77.8 66.7 88.9 83.3 88.9 66.7 50.0 76.2 17 100 88.9 66.7 88.9 83.3 88.9 66.7 83.3 82.5 18 100 100 83.3 88.9 100 100 100 83.3 93.7 19 100 100 91.7 88.9 100 88.9 83.3 100 93.7 20 100 100 83.3 77.8 100 88.9 100 100 92.1 21 100 100 83.3 88.9 100 88.9 83.3 100 92.1 22 100 100 83.3 88.9 100 100 100 100 95.2 23 100 88.9 83.3 88.9 100 100 100 100 93.7 24 100 100 75.0 88.9 100 100 100 100 93.7 25 100 100 83.3 88.9 100 100 100 100 95.2 26 100 100 91.7 88.9 100 100 100 100 96.8 27 100 100 91.7 88.9 100 100 100 100 96.8 28 100 100 91.7 88.9 100 100 100 100 96.8 29 100 100 91.7 88.9 100 100 100 100 96.8 30 100 100 91.7 88.9 100 100 100 100 96.8 31 100 100 100 88.9 100 100 100 100 98.4 32 100 100 100 88.9 100 100 100 100 98.4 33 100 100 100 88.9 100 100 100 100 98.4 34 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Table 5.
Comparison results of material and sample View tableTable 5.
Comparison results of material and sample Material QF SJ WD XS XBB XXY XZL YR JC1 √ JC2 √
Tools
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Ji Jiahua, Wang Jifen, He Xinlong. Classification of Handkerchief Paper Brand Based on Spectral Data Fusion Technology[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2021, 58(3): 3300041
Paper Information
Category: Spectroscopy
Received: Jun. 24, 2020
Accepted: --
Published Online: Mar. 12, 2021
The Author Email: Wang Jifen (wangjifen58@126.com)
© Copyright 2018-2021 | Chinese Laser Press.
All Rights Reserved 沪ICP备15018463号-20