ArticleHeliyon2024
Computer vision based deep learning approach for toxic and harmful substances detection in fruits.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Review of Machine Learning and AI Applications in Enhancing HACCP Systems for Ice Cream Manufacturing.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Enhancing the YOLOv8 model for realtime object detection to ensure online platform safety.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Development of an Artificial Vision for a Parallel Manipulator Using Machine-to-Machine Technologies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Formaldehyde (CH₂O) is one of the significant chemicals mixed with different perishable fruits in Bangladesh. The fruits are artificially preserved for extended periods by dishonest vendors using this dangerous chemical. Such substances are complicated to detect in appearance. Hence, a reliable and robust detection technique is required. To overcome this challenge and address the issue, we introduce comprehensive deep learning-based techniques for detecting toxic substances. Four different types of fruits, both in fresh and chemically mixed conditions, are used in this experiment. We have applied diverse data augmentation techniques to enlarge the dataset. The performance of four different pre-trained deep learning models was then assessed, and a brand-new model named "DurbeenNet," created especially for this task, was presented. The primary objective was to gauge the efficacy of our proposed model compared to well-established deep learning architectures. Our assessment centered on the models' accuracy in detecting toxic substances. According to our research, GoogleNet detected toxic substances with an accuracy rate of 85.53 %, VGG-16 with an accuracy rate of 87.44 %, DenseNet with an impressive accuracy rate of 90.37 %, and ResNet50 with an accuracy rate of 91.66 %. Notably, the proposed model, DurbeenNet, outshone all other models, boasting an impressive accuracy rate of 96.71 % in detecting toxic substances among the sample fruits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.