Research Article

Enhancing the Paddy Disease Classification by Using Cross-Validation Strategy for Artificial Neural Network over Baseline Classifiers

Table 1

Survey on techniques utilized to classify leaf disease, respectively.

Author and year of publicationTechniquesType of leafType of diseaseDataset countTesting accuracy

[24]Simple linear cluster and support vector machine (SVM)Tea plant leafTea anthracnose (Ta), tea brown blight (Tbb), tea netted blister blight (Tnbb), Exobasidium vexans Massee (EVM), and Pestalotiopsis1308Accuracy-98.5%
Precision-96.8%
Recall-98.6%
value-97.7%
[25]Region proposed network, Chan-Vese algorithmPlant diseasesBlack rot, bacteria plaque, and rust471483.57%
[26]Extreme learning machine, support vector machinePlant leaf diseasesLSVM-87.5%
PSVM-92.5%
ELM-95%
[27]ML (support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and stochastic gradient descent (SGD)) and DL (Inception-v3, VGG-16, and VGG-19)Citrus diseasesCanker, black spot, and greening melanosis609RF-76.8%, SGD-86.5%, SVM-87%, , and VGG-16–89.5%
[28]Deep convolutional neural networkCitrus pestCitrus leaf miner, sooty mold, and Pulvinaria1774Accuracy-99.04
[29]Representative as light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM) and eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost)Allergen nomenclature (not leaf data)583 food allergens, 600 food proteinsAccuracy-0.957
[30]Random forest, K-nearest neighborPlant diseaseBrown rust, early blight, and late blight1000SVM-93%
RF-96%