Classification of rubberized coir fibres using deep learning-based neural fuzzy decision tree approach

  • S. RemyaEmail author
  • R. Sasikala


Indian coir industry is one among the small-scale cottage industries which contributes a great amount to the economy of India. India and Sri Lanka are the top two international producers, and they account for 90% of world coir manufacturing. The modern digital technologies can monitor the physical, chemical and microbiological properties in agriculture sector and can analyse the data in a faster manner. This paper highlights the large opportunities of deep learning in agriculture as an intelligent method for classifying and predicting the quality of the raw materials and thereby correlating into suitable products in the agricultural sector. Here we gathered the dataset from Central Coir Research Institute, Alappuzha, tested the chemical properties and applied several decision tree algorithms on the dataset and compared for analysis. This paper focuses specifically on a hybrid method with the usage of the back-propagation in deep learning and fuzzy logic decision tree. Experimental results reveal that the proposed method shows an accuracy of 98.75%. The comparison results with various decision tree-based classification algorithms, such as C4.5, ID3, CART, Naïve Bayes, fuzzy, MLP, verify the effectiveness of the proposed method.


Rubberized mattress Coir fibre Decision tree Artificial neural network Trade analysis Deep learning Data mining Back-propagation Agriculture industry 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Abu-halaweh NM, Harrison RW (2009) Practical fuzzy decision trees. In: Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on computational intelligence and data mining, CIDM 2009, Nashville, TN, USA.
  2. Allahbakhsh M, Benatallah B, Ignjatovic A, Motahari-Nezhad HR, Bertino E, Dustdar S (2013) Quality control in crowdsourcing systems: issues and directions. IEEE Internet Comput 17(2):76–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aydin I, Karakose M, Akin E (2009) The prediction algorithm based on fuzzy logic using time series data mining method, pp 91–98Google Scholar
  4. Azmir J, Zaidul ISM, Rahman MM, Sharif KM, Mohamed A, Sahena F, Omar AKM (2013) Techniques for extraction of bioactive compounds from plant materials: a review. J Food Eng 117(4):426–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Basso B, Cammarano D, Carfagna E (2013) Review of crop yield forecasting methods and early warning systems. In Proceedings of the first meeting of the scientific advisory committee of the global strategy to improve agricultural and rural statistics, FAO Headquarters, Rome, Italy, pp 18–19Google Scholar
  6. Bastiaanssen WGM, Molden DJ, Makin IW (2000) Remote sensing for irrigated agriculture: examples from research and possible applications. Agric Water Manag 46(2):137–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bok B, Caratelli D, Giannone D, Sbordone A, Tambalotti A (2017) Macroeconomic nowcasting and forecasting with Big Data (830). Retrieved from
  8. Bornn L, Zidek JV (2012) Efficient stabilization of crop yield prediction in the Canadian prairies. Agric For Meteorol 152:223–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choudhury A, Jones J (2014) Crop yield prediction using time series models. J Econ Econ Educ Res 15(3):53Google Scholar
  10. Dai W, Ji W (2014) A mapreduce implementation of C4. 5. Decision Tree Algorithm 7(1):49–60Google Scholar
  11. Hartmann PM, Zaki M, Feldmann N, Neely A (2014) Big data for big business? A taxonomy of data-driven business models used by start-up firms. Cambridge Service Alliance Whitepaper, pp 1–29.
  12. Hashem IAT, Yaqoob I, Anuar NB, Mokhtar S, Gani A, Khan SU (2015) The rise of “big data” on cloud computing: review and open research issues. Information Systems 47:98–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Havens TC, Anderson DT, Wagner C, Deilamsalehy H, Wonnacott D (2013) Fuzzy integrals of crowd-sourced intervals using a measure of generalized accord. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ), pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  14. He X, Xu S (2010) Artificial neural networks. Process neural networks: theory and applications, pp 20–42Google Scholar
  15. Hopfield JJ (1988) Artificial neural networks. IEEE Circuits Devices Mag 4(5):3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hung NQ, Babel MS, Weesakul S, Tripathi NK (2009) An artificial neural network model for rainfall forecasting in Bangkok, Thailand. Hydrology Earth Syst Sci 13(8):1413–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ilonen J, Kamarainen J-K, Lampinen J (2003) Differential evolution training algorithm for feed-forward neural networks. Neural Process Lett 17(1):93–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kamilaris A, Kartakoullis A, Prenafeta-Boldú FX (2017) A review on the practice of big data analysis in agriculture. Comput Electron Agric 143:23–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim MW, Lee JG, Min C (1999) Efficient fuzzy rule generation based on fuzzy decision tree for data mining. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Fuzzy Systems. IEEE, Seoul, South Korea.
  20. Kumar P, Sarangi A, Singh DK, Parihar SS, Sahoo RN (2015) Simulation of salt dynamics in the root zone and yield of wheat crop under irrigated saline regimes using SWAP model. Agric Water Manag 148:72–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G (2015) Deep learning. Nature 521(7553):436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lin C-T, Lee CSG (1996) Neural fuzzy systems. PTR Prentice Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Loh W-Y (2011) Classification and regression trees. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Data Min Knowl Discov 1(1):14–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lucey BM, Vigne SA, Ballester L, Barbopoulos L, Brzeszczynski J, Carchano O, Zaghini A (2018) Future directions in international financial integration research—a crowdsourced perspective. Int Rev Financ Anal 55:35–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luis RW, Box KPO, Sp SC (n.d.) FuzzyDT FuzzyDT FuzzyDT 2 Fuzzy Classi cation SystemsGoogle Scholar
  26. Miglietta F, Bindi M (1993) Crop growth simulation models for research, farm management and agrometeorology. EARSEL Adv Rem Sens 2(6):148–157Google Scholar
  27. Palamutcu S, Devrent N (n.d.) Technical textiles for agricultural applicationsGoogle Scholar
  28. Pretty J (2008) Agricultural sustainability: concepts, principles and evidence. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 363(1491):447–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ray DK, Gerber JS, MacDonald GK, West PC (2015) Climate variation explains a third of global crop yield variability. Nat Commun 6:5989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reghuvaran A, Ravindranath A Das (2013) Bioconversion of coir pith as effective soil less media for roof gardening. Adv Appl Res 5(2):141–146Google Scholar
  31. Santhanam T, Ephzibah EP (2015) Heart disease prediction using hybrid genetic fuzzy model. Indian J Sci Tehnol 8:797–803. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schmidhuber J (2015) Deep learning in neural networks: an overview. Neural Networks 61:85–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schoenherr T, Speier-Pero C (2015) Data science, predictive analytics, and big data in supply chain management: current state and future potential. J Bus Logist 36(1):120–132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Segatori A, Marcelloni F, Pedrycz W (2016) On distributed fuzzy decision trees for big data. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst. Google Scholar
  35. Stafford JV (2000) Implementing precision agriculture in the 21st century. J Agric Eng Res 76(3):267–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sudhakaran Pillai M, Vasudev R (2001) Applications of coir in agricultural textiles. International Seminar on Technical Textiles. Mumbai, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  37. Tran DV, Nguyen NV (2006) The concept and implementation of precision farming and rice integrated crop management systems for sustainable production in the twenty-first century. Int Rice Comm Newsl 55:91–102Google Scholar
  38. Turban E, Sharda R, Delen D (2011) Decision support and business intelligence systems. Pearson Education India, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  39. Vagh Y (2012) An investigation into the effect of stochastic annual rainfall on crop yields in South Western Australia. Int J Inf Educ Technol 2(3):227Google Scholar
  40. Veenadhari S, Mishra B, Singh CD (2011) Soybean productivity modelling using decision tree algorithms. Int J Comput Appl 27(7):11–15Google Scholar
  41. Wilson C (2007) Flow resistance models for flexible submerged vegetation. J Hydrol 342(3–4):213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CSEVIT UniversityVelloreIndia

Personalised recommendations