skip to main content
10.1145/3582099.3582105acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaicccConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Car Types and Semantics Classification Using Weka

Published:20 April 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a method of using Weka, a machine learning tool, to identify the difference of types and product semantics between fuel vehicles and electric vehicles. Pictures of 58 fuel vehicles and 42 pictures of electric vehicles during time period from 2021 to 2023 are selectively collected from Consumer Reports website to build the dataset. The fuel vehicle brands include Audi, BMW, Cadillac, and Lexus with 3 types, namely, SUV, Sedan and Luxury. In addition to the above-mentioned brands, Tesla is the 5th brand of electric vehicles. The perception of each picture is labelled by questionnaires of Automotive Model Semantics. Results reveal that even the smaller dataset can be trained to have highly accuracy models for classifying fuel vehicles and electric vehicles, different types as well as product semantics. The method presented is promising for studying car styling and exploring new applications of image classification to branding and product design.

References

  1. Audi official website.https://www.audi.com.tw/tw/web/zh/models/e-tron-gt/audi-e-tron-gt.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. MarcLichte. https://www.audi.com.tw/tw/web/zh/Audidestination/Audidestination/Spring_summer_marc_lichte.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Ali, M., & Tahir, M. A., & Durrani, M. N. (2022).Vehicle images dataset for make and model recognition, Data in Brief, Volume 42, 2022, 108107, ISSN 2352-3409, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2022.108107.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Albini, L. A., Gutoski, M., & Lopes, H. S. (2020). Car Make and Model Classification with Deep Learning Methods. ChemBioChem. http://silverio.net.br/heitor/publicacoes/2019/cbic19c.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Lee, P. H. (2009). Analogies between Facial Expressions and the Front View Designs of Cars.A Thesis Submitted to Institute of Applied Arts College of Humanities and Social Sciences National Chiao Tung University In partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Arts In Design.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Steven Langa , Felipe Bravo-Marquezb , Christopher Beckhamc , Mark Halld , Eibe Franke(2019).WekaDeeplearning4j: a Deep Learning Package for Weka based on DeepLearning4j.eDepartment of Computer Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Kim, D. G., Shin, K. J., & Woo, J. H. (2020). Displacement Measurement of Steel Pipe Support Using Image Processing Technology, Journal of Image and Graphics, 8(3), 80-84, September 2020. doi: 10.18178/joig.8.3.80-84Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Vimina, E. R., & Poulose Jacob, K. (2013). Content Based Image Retrieval Using Low Level Features of Automatically Extracted Regions of Interest. Journal of Image and Graphics, 1, 1, 7-11, March 2013. doi: 10.12720/joig.1.1.7-11Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Liu, Y., Qiao, Y. G., Hao, Y., & Wang, F. P., & Rashid, S. F. (2021). Single Image Super Resolution Techniques Based on Deep Learning: Status, Applications and Future Directions, Journal of Image and Graphics, 9(3). 74-86, September 2021. doi: 10.18178/joig.9.3.74-86Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Khan, W. (2013). Image Segmentation Techniques: A Survey, Journal of Image and Graphics, 1(4). 166-170, December 2013. doi: 10.12720/joig.1.4.166-170Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Syakirin Rosli, N., Fauadi, M. H. F. M., & Awang, N. (2016). Some Technique for an Image of Defect in Inspection Process Based on Image Processing, Journal of Image and Graphics, 4(1), 55-58, June 2016. doi: 10.18178/joig.4.1.55-58Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Andersson, T., Holmlid, S., & Warell, A. (2013).Product gist An approach to identifying form characteristics of the current product sign.Crafting the Future 2013, the 10th European Academy of design Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Graf, L. K. M., & Landwehr, J. R. (2017). Aesthetic pleasure versus aesthetic interest: The two routes to aesthetic liking. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Athavankar, U. (2009). From product Semantics to Generative Methods. IASDR’09. 59-68.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Graf, L. K. M., & Landwehr, J. R. (2017). Aesthetic Pleasure versus Aesthetic Interest: The Two Routes to Aesthetic Liking. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(15).http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00015Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hong, Z. J. (2022). Exploring the cognitive differences between electric vehicles and fuel vehicles (Master's thesis). National Union University Design Institute.Atul Adya, Paramvir Bahl, Jitendra Padhye, Alec Wolman, and Lidong Zhou. 2004. A multi-radio unification protocol for IEEE 802.11 wireless networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE 1st International Conference on Broadnets Networks (BroadNets’04) . IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1109/BROADNETS.2004.8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Atul Adya, Paramvir Bahl, Jitendra Padhye, Alec Wolman, and Lidong Zhou. 2004. A multi-radio unification protocol for IEEE 802.11 wireless networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE 1st International Conference on Broadnets Networks (BroadNets’04) . IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1109/BROADNETS.2004.8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Sam Anzaroot and Andrew McCallum. 2013. UMass Citation Field Extraction Dataset. Retrieved May 27, 2019 from http://www.iesl.cs.umass.edu/data/data-umasscitationfieldGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Martin A. Fischler and Robert C. Bolles. 1981. Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun. ACM 24, 6 (June 1981), 381–395. https://doi.org/10.1145/358669.358692Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Chelsea Finn. 2018. Learning to Learn with Gradients. PhD Thesis, EECS Department, University of Berkeley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jon M. Kleinberg. 1999. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. J. ACM 46, 5 (September 1999), 604–632. https://doi.org/10.1145/324133.324140Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Matthew Van Gundy, Davide Balzarotti, and Giovanni Vigna. 2007. Catch me, if you can: Evading network signatures with web-based polymorphic worms. In Proceedings of the first USENIX workshop on Offensive Technologies (WOOT ’07) . USENIX Association, Berkley, CA, Article 7, 9 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. James W. Demmel, Yozo Hida, William Kahan, Xiaoye S. Li, Soni Mukherjee, and Jason Riedy. 2005. Error Bounds from Extra Precise Iterative Refinement. Technical Report No. UCB/CSD-04-1344. University of California, Berkeley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. David Harel. 1979. First-Order Dynamic Logic. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 68. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09237-4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Jason Jerald. 2015. The VR Book: Human-Centered Design for Virtual Reality. Association for Computing Machinery and Morgan & Claypool.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Prokop, Emily. 2018. The Story Behind. Mango Publishing Group. Florida, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. R Core Team. 2019. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Brian K. Reid. 1980. A high-level approach to computer document formatting. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. ACM, New York, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/567446.567449Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. John R. Smith and Shih-Fu Chang. 1997. Visual Seek: a fully automated content-based image query system. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM international conference on Multimedia (MULTIMEDIA ’96). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1145/244130.244151Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. TUG 2017. Institutional members of the LaTeX Users Group. Retrieved May 27, 2017 from http://wwtug.org/instmem.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Alper Yilmaz, Omar Javed, and Mubarak Shah. 2006. Object tracking: A survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 38, 4 (December 2006), 13–es. https://doi.org/10.1145/1177352.1177355Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Patricia S. Abril and Robert Plant. 2007. The patent holder's dilemma: Buy, sell, or troll? Commun. ACM 50, 1 (Jan. 2007), 36-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1188913.1188915Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Sarah Cohen, Werner Nutt, and Yehoshua Sagic. 2007. Deciding equivalences among conjunctive aggregate queries. J. ACM 54, 2, Article 5 (April 2007), 50 pages. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1219092.1219093Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. David Kosiur. 2001. Understanding Policy-Based Networking (2nd. ed.). Wiley, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Ian Editor (Ed.). 2007. The title of book one (1st. ed.). The name of the series one, Vol. 9. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09237-4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Donald E. Knuth. 1997. The Art of Computer Programming, Vol. 1: Fundamental Algorithms (3rd. ed.). Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Sten Andler. 1979. Predicate path expressions. In Proceedings of the 6th. ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL '79), January 29 - 31, 1979, San Antonio, Texas. ACM Inc., New York, NY, 226-236. https://doi.org/10.1145/567752.567774Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Joseph Scientist. 2009. The fountain of youth. (Aug. 2009). Patent No. 12345, Filed July 1st., 2008, Issued Aug. 9th., 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. David Harel. 1978. LOGICS of Programs: AXIOMATICS and DESCRIPTIVE POWER. MIT Research Lab Technical Report TR-200. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Kenneth L. Clarkson. 1985. Algorithms for Closest-Point Problems (Computational Geometry). Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA. UMI Order Number: AAT 8506171.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. David A. Anisi. 2003. Optimal Motion Control of a Ground Vehicle. Master's thesis. Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Harry Thornburg. 2001. Introduction to Bayesian Statistics. (March 2001). Retrieved March 2, 2005 from http://ccrma.stanford.edu/∼jos/bayes/bayes.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. ACM. Association for Computing Machinery: Advancing Computing as a Science & Profession. Retrieved from http://www.acm.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Wikipedia. 2017. Wikipedia: the Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.wikipedia.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Dave Novak. 2003. Solder man. Video. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2003 Video Review on Animation theater Program: Part I - Vol. 145 (July 27-27, 2003). ACM Press, New York, NY, 4. DOI: https://doi.org/99.9999/woot07-S422Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Barack Obama. 2008. A more perfect union. Video. (5 March 2008). Retrieved March 21, 2008 from http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6528042696351994555Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Martha Constantinou. 2016. New physics searches from nucleon matrix elements in lattice QCD. arXiv:1701.00133. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.00133Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    AICCC '22: Proceedings of the 2022 5th Artificial Intelligence and Cloud Computing Conference
    December 2022
    302 pages
    ISBN:9781450398749
    DOI:10.1145/3582099

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 20 April 2023

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)56
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format