Comparison of Balancing Strategies for Classifying Guava Fruit Diseases

Authors

  • Putri Nabilla STMIK IKMI Cirebon
  • Nana Suarna STMIK IKMI Cirebon
  • Agus Bahtiar STMIK IKMI Cirebon
  • Nining Rahaningsih STMIK IKMI Cirebon
  • Willy Prihartono STMIK IKMI Cirebon

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59934/jaiea.v5i2.1859

Keywords:

Class Imbalance, Weighted Loss Function, Oversampling, MobileNetV2, Guava Disease Classification

Abstract

The problem of class imbalance often poses an obstacle in deep learning-based image classification, especially in the domain of digital agriculture. The imbalance in data distribution makes it easier for models to recognize the majority class, while performance for the minority class declines. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of three strategies for handling class imbalance: Weighted Loss Function, Oversampling, and a combination of Weighted Loss and Oversampling, in improving the performance of image classification of guava fruit diseases using a transfer learning-based MobileNetV2 architecture. The dataset consists of 3,784 images of three disease classes, namely Anthracnose, Fruit_Fly, and Healthy_guava, which show an imbalanced distribution. The research was conducted through the stages of Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA), pre-processing, augmentation, model training with four scenarios, and evaluation using Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1-Score, and Macro Average F1-Score. The results showed that the Combination model (Oversampling and Weighted Loss) performed best on the minority class with an F1-score of 0.9630, the highest among all models. The Oversampling strategy produced the highest Macro F1-score of 0.9617, while Weighted Loss provided a significant improvement in classification sensitivity but was still below the combination model. Thus, it can be concluded that the combination strategy is the most effective approach in improving the sensitivity of the model to minority classes, while Oversampling excels in the overall performance stability of the model.

 

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

H. N. Ngugi, A. A. Akinyelu, and A. E. Ezugwu, “Machine learning and deep learning for crop disease diagnosis: performance analysis and review,” Agronomy, vol. 14, no. 12, p. 3001, 2024, doi: 10.3390/agronomy14123001.

A. O. Adegbenjo and M. O. Ngadi, “Handling the imbalanced problem in agri-food data analysis,” Foods, vol. 13, no. 20, p. 3300, 2024, doi: 10.3390/foods13203300.

M. Xu et al., “Embracing limited and imperfect training datasets: opportunities and challenges in plant disease recognition using deep learning,” Front Plant Sci, vol. 14, p. 1225409, 2023, doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1225409.

D. Dablain, B. Krawczyk, and N. Chawla, “Towards a holistic view of bias in machine learning: bridging algorithmic fairness and imbalanced learning,” Discover Data, vol. 2, p. 4, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s44248-024-00007-1.

S. Albahli and M. Masood, “Efficient attention-based CNN network (EANet) for multi-class maize crop disease classification,” Front Plant Sci, vol. 13, p. 1003152, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.1003152.

H. Alghamdi and T. Turki, “PDD-Net: Plant disease diagnoses using multilevel and multiscale convolutional neural network features,” Agriculture, vol. 13, no. 5, p. 1072, 2023, doi: 10.3390/agriculture13051072.

J. Mu, Q. Feng, J. Yang, J. Zhang, and S. Yang, “Few-shot disease recognition algorithm based on supervised contrastive learning,” Front Plant Sci, vol. 15, p. 1341831, 2024, doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1341831.

X. Wang and W. Cao, “GACN: Generative Adversarial Classified Network for Balancing Plant Disease Dataset and Plant Disease Recognition,” Sensors, vol. 23, no. 15, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.3390/s23156844.

B. Min, T. Kim, D. Shin, and D. Shin, “Data Augmentation Method for Plant Leaf Disease Recognition,” Applied Sciences (Switzerland), vol. 13, no. 3, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.3390/app13031465.

O. Khare, S. Mane, H. Kulkarni, and N. Barve, “LeafNST: an improved data augmentation method for classification of plant disease using object-based neural style transfer,” Discover Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4, no. 1, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s44163-024-00150-3.

V. Da Poian et al., “Exploratory data analysis (EDA) machine learning approaches for ocean world analog mass spectrometry,” Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, vol. 10, p. 1134141, 2023, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2023.1134141.

M. Pradnyatama, “MobileNetV2 and Xception for butterfly species classification,” Jurnal Masyarakat Informatika, vol. 16, no. 1, 2025, doi: 10.xxx/xxxxx.

L. Yong, L. Ma, D. Sun, and L. Du, “Application of MobileNetV2 to waste classification,” PLoS One, vol. 18, no. 3, p. e0282336, 2023, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282336.

Downloads

Published

2026-02-15

How to Cite

Putri Nabilla, Suarna, N. ., Bahtiar, A., Rahaningsih, N., & Prihartono, W. (2026). Comparison of Balancing Strategies for Classifying Guava Fruit Diseases. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA), 5(2), 2320–2328. https://doi.org/10.59934/jaiea.v5i2.1859