Determination of photosynthetic pigments in intact leaves is an essential step in the plant analysis. Along with the rapid development of digital imaging technology and artificial intelligence, now determination of plant pigments can be done in a non- destructive and real-time manner. In previous research, a prototype of the non-destructive and real-time system has been developed by utilizing the Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) model to produce predictions of three main photosynthetic pigments, i.e., chlorophyll, carotenoid, and anthocyanin. The CNN model was chosen due to its ability to handle raw digital image data without prior feature extraction. In the near future, this ability will be useful for developing analytical portable devices. Input of the system is multispectral plant digital image, and the output are predicted pigment concentration. Convolutional Neural Network performance depends on several factors, among them are data quality, algorithm tuning (weight initialization, learning rate, activation function, network topology, batches and epochs, optimization and loss) and models combination. The focus of this research is to improve the accuracy of CNN model by optimizing the selection for updating CNN architecture parameters which are optimization method and the loss function. As it is already known, there is no single optimizer can outperform for all cases. The selection for the optimizer should be made by considering the variability of the data and the nonlinearity level of the relationship patterns that exist in the data. Because the theoretical calculation is not enough to determine the best optimizer, an experiment is needed to see at firsthand the performance of optimizers that allegedly matches the characteristics of the data being analyzed. Gradient descent optimization method is well known for its ease of computing and speed of convergence on large datasets. Here, 7 gradient descent-based optimizers were compared, i.e., Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD), Adaptive Gradient (Adagrad), Adaptive Delta (Adadelta), Root Mean Square Propagation (RMSProp), Adaptive Momentum (Adam), Adaptive Max Pooling (Adamax), and Nesterov Adaptive Momentum (Nadam). From the eksperiment result it is known that Adam is the best optimizer to improve LeNet ability in handling a digital image-pigments content relationship. However, when the resources for experimentation is limited, using Adadelta and Adamax is a wise choice to minimize risk.

1.
K.
Fukushima
,
Neural Networks
1
(
3
),
119
130
(
1988
).
2.
Y.
LeCun
,
L.
Bottou
,
Y.
Bengio
, and
P.
Haffner
, “
Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition
,” in
Shock Compression of Condensed Matter-2001
,
IEEE Conference Proceedings
(
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
,
Melville, NY
,
1998
), pp.
2278
2342
.
3.
A.
Krizhevsky
,
I.
Sutskever
, and
G. E.
Hinton
, “
Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural network,” in
International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems
(
Lake Tahoe, Nevada
,
2012
), pp.
1097
1105
.
4.
A.
Bhandare
,
M.
Bhide
,
P.
Gokhale
, and
R.
Chandavarkar
,
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies
7
(
5
),
2206
2215
(
2016
).
5.
K. R.
Prilianti
,
I. C.
Onggara
,
M. A. S.
Adhiwibawa
,
T. H. P.
Brotosudarmo
,
S.
Anam
, and
A.
Suryanto
, “
Multispectral imaging and convolutional neural network for photosynthetic pigments prediction
,” in
2018 15th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Computer Science and Informatics
,
IEEE Conference Proceedings
(
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
,
Malang, Indonesia
,
2018
), pp.
749
754
.
6.
S.
Ruder
,
An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms
, ArXiv preprint arXiv:1609.04747 (
2016
).
7.
P.
Toulis
,
T.
Horel
, and
E. M.
Airoldi
,
Stable robbins-monro approximations through stochastic proximal updates
, ArXiv preprint arXiv:1510.00967v3 (
2018
).
8.
J.
Duchi
,
E.
Hazan
, and
Y.
Singer
,
Journal of Machine Learning Research
12
,
2121
2159
(
2011
).
9.
M. D.
Zeiler
,
Adadelta: An adaptive learning rate method
, ArXiv preprint arXiv:1212.5701 (
2012
).
10.
G.
Hinton
,
N.
Srivastava
, and
K.
Swersky
,
Overview of mini batch gradient descent, Lecture 6a. Class Lecture, Computer Science Department
,
University of Toronto
(
2015
).
11.
D. P.
Kingma
and
J. L.
Ba
, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” in
International Conference on Learning Representations
(
San Diego
,
2015
).
12.
T.
Dozat
, “Incorporating nesterov momentum into adam,” in
International Conference on Learning Repre-sentations Workshop
(
San Juan, Puerto Rico
,
2016
), pp.
2013
2016
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.