A Taxonomy of Food Supply Chain Problems from a Computational Intelligence Perspective
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- A new taxonomy that provides a comprehensive view of different FSC problems located in the chain stages typically studied in the scientific literature (production, processing, distribution, and retail). This taxonomy represents a new and broader proposal in order to identify and define FSC problems that have been approached using CI in the four aforementioned stages. Besides, although some research articles have described diverse FSC problems, their definitions are not unified and vary from one paper to another. Thus, this taxonomy also represents an effort to unify and consolidate definitions of the FSC problems available in the literature, which represents a valuable source of information for FSC researchers and practitioners working in this domain.
- To classify the FSC problems from a CI perspective. This classification allows FSC problems to be mapped into common categories of problems in the CI domain. Thus, we provide a framework that helps display the similarities and differences among FSC problems depending on how they can be modeled under a CI perspective. To the best of our knowledge, in this regard, no classification has been previously proposed.
- To establish a set of guidelines for the use of CI in the FSC field. These guidelines aim to help FSC researchers and practitioners to identify which FSC problems can be addressed using CI, and the most appropriate families of techniques to solve them. Thus, these guidelines represent a first attempt to define a general framework to support the model selection problem at the point where the fields of FSC and CI converge.
- To identify and discuss challenges and research opportunities in the FSC domain, which are directed towards more robust, explainable, interoperable, and accurate CI solutions that support FSC management and operation.
2. Background and Motivation
2.1. Food Supply Chain
2.2. Computational Intelligence Approaches
2.2.1. CI-Based Statistical Learning Methods
2.2.2. Artificial Neural Networks and Deep Learning
2.2.3. CI-Based Optimization Methods
2.2.4. Fuzzy Systems
2.2.5. Probabilistic Reasoning
2.2.6. Summary of CI-Based Approaches
2.3. Motivation
3. A Taxonomy of CI-Based Problems in the Food Supply Chain
3.1. Methodology for the Design of the Taxonomy
3.2. The Taxonomy Overview
3.3. Level 2: Identification and Definition of Food Supply Chain Problems
3.3.1. Production Problems
- Fish weight estimation: This process estimates fish weight considering morphological features (e.g., length, width, and mass).
- Production estimation and optimization: This process is centered on the optimization of fish production and forecasting of seasonal demand to adjust the production. To accomplish such aims, the optimization of production is carried out by monitoring crucial elements of fish ponds, like water oxygen levels, nutrients, and food supply, which influence the growth of fish. Meanwhile, historical records of seasonal demand are stored and continuously analyzed to determine the most suitable levels of production depending on the year and season.
- Crop yield and harvesting prediction: This problem is focused on yield estimation to match crop supply with demand and on crop management to increase productivity.
- Crop protection: This is based on the identification and diagnosis of biotic (infestations, diseases, and weeds) and abiotic (nutrients, water deficiency) stress factors that affect crop productivity.
- Weather prediction and irrigation management: This problem is mainly concerned with weather forecasting for the optimal use of water, which enables the design and deployment of crop irrigation scheduling and planning.
- Site-specific nutrient management: This is based on the management of soil quality to determine which nutrients need to be supplied in order to maintain the chemical characteristics required for the crop under consideration.
- Grassland monitoring: This problem is related to the accurate identification of grassland inventories in order to discriminate between the most suitable types for livestock purposes.
- Animal welfare: This is focused on the pattern classification of ingestive behavior in grazing animals for studies of animal nutrition, growth, and health.
- Animal behavior tracking: This is based on the use of behavior analysis to detect early signs of health issues and promote early intervention.
- Livestock production: This problem is centered on predictions and estimations of farming parameters to optimize the economic-energy efficiency and sustainability of production systems.
3.3.2. Processing Problems
- Demand prediction: This problem in concerneed with the demand prediction of food requirements to avoid overstocking, overproduction, and over-utilization of resources. The key idea is to estimate the quantity of food products that will be sold to define how much raw material needs to be processed.
- Production planning for distribution: This is centered on production planning to match distribution requirements. This problem is mostly determined by the sale volumes that a particular food product is expected to have.
- Prediction of post-harvest losses: This is focused on making estimations of food losses associated with the processing procedures carried out after harvesting raw materials coming from the production stage.
- Food manufacturing industry: This is associated with the optimization of the processing technologies required to transform raw foods into edible food (e.g., thermal, drying, contact cooking, microwave heating, etc.). These processes are performed using industrial machinery.
3.3.3. Distribution Problems
- Vehicle routing and fleet management: This is focused on determining the most optimal route for the delivery of food under different scenario constraints (e.g., size of the fleet, fuel availability, etc.).
- Storage location assignment problem: This problem is concerned with deciding the most suitable way to store food products in a set of warehouses in order to cope with daily demand operations.
- Prediction of supply chain risks and disruptions: This is concerned with the forecasting of potential disruptions in the logistics of food products and their associated food losses.
- Shelf life prediction and maturity level: This problem is related to the forecasting of shelf life based on data sensed during the distribution process.
- Demand forecasting: This consists of understanding demand behaviors and forecasting user demand generated from the retail stage. Thus, it is possible to optimize the delivery routes and warehouse locations used during the distribution stage.
- Last mile delivery: This problem is dedicated to the delivery of food products using the local road transport network (last mile) of cities.
3.3.4. Retail Problems
- Diet and Nutrition: This is based on estimating nutrient values using the classification of food dishes and dietary assessment.
- Food consumption and food waste: This problem is associated with the identification and prediction of food waste based on the buying and storage behavior of end-customers.
- Consumer demand, perception, and buying behavior: This problem is focused on determining consumer profiles in order to predict buying behaviors and support the management of shop counters.
- Dynamic discounting based on sell-by date: This is centered on automated price changes at supermarkets based on the sell-by date. The objective is to offer larger discounts for items with the shortest remaining shelf life.
- Daily demand prediction and inventory management: This problem consists of predicting daily demand to better manage product stocks at supermarkets.
3.4. Level 3: Typologies of CI Problems
- Problem-solving: This category is related to problems of complex decision-making processes that need to be solved, keeping two key objectives in mind: quality of the solution and the computational time required to solve it. As a common denominator, this attribute categorizes problems that are NP-hard. Thus, this class embodies FSC problems for which there is no certainty that the method can optimally solve them in a polynomial time (time complexity [96]) with respect to the input data size. This category includes, for example, optimization or search problems such as the vehicle routing problem in the transportation stage of the FSC.
- Uncertain knowledge and reasoning: This category corresponds to FSC problems characterized by having partially observable, non-deterministic, vague, or imprecise data. In such uncertain scenarios, this attribute represents problems that can be addressed in two possible ways. First, by using an approach that acts based on assumptions of uncertain input data in order to give a probabilistic-based solution to the problem at hand. Or second, by representing and reasoning with the partially available information in a manner similar to the way that humans express knowledge and summarize data. This second approach allows non-exact data to be represented in linguist terms in order to make decisions within certain margins of correctness.
- Knowledge discovery and function approximation: This class represents FSC problems that are distinguished by having large volumes of data, which enable understanding and useful knowledge to be extracted from them. Such knowledge could be used to make either predictions of future events or discrimination and recognition of patterns. These types of problems can usually be addressed with methods that can be trained using the available data to learn a specific task.
- Communication and perception: This category consists of FSC problems focused on the automatic extraction, analysis, and understanding of information obtained from digital images, texts, or voice recordings. It is worth noting that within the FSC domain, most problems solved using a communication and perception approach are focused on designing and developing autonomous computer vision systems. These systems are able to process high-dimensional data to support decision-making; from object detection to video tracking and object recognition.
3.5. Mapping Process between Level 2 and Level 3: Classification of FSC Problems from a CI Perspective
3.5.1. Classification of Production Problems
3.5.2. Classification of Processing Problems
3.5.3. Classification of Distribution Problems
3.5.4. Classification of Retail Problems
4. Guidelines for the Use of Computational Intelligence Approaches in the Food Supply Chain
5. Conclusions
5.1. Summary
5.2. Challenges and Research Opportunities
5.2.1. Data Fusion from Different Data Sources
5.2.2. Real-Time Data and Incremental Learning
5.2.3. Explainability of Computational Intelligence Methods
5.2.4. The Method Selection Problem
5.2.5. Interoperability and Deployment of CI with Information and Communication Technologies
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- World Population Projected to Reach 9.8 Billion in 2050, and 11.2 Billion in 2100. 2017. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/world-population-prospects-2017.html (accessed on 30 September 2010).
- Misra, N.N.; Dixit, Y.; Al-Mallahi, A.; Bhullar, M.S.; Upadhyay, R.; Martynenko, A. IoT, big data and artificial intelligence in agriculture and food industry. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kacprzyk, J.; Pedrycz, W. Introduction. In Springer Handbook of Computational Intelligence; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Bishop, C.M. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Kakani, V.; Nguyen, V.H.; Kumar, B.P.; Kim, H.; Pasupuleti, V.R. A critical review on computer vision and artificial intelligence in food industry. J. Agric. Food Res. 2020, 2, 100033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liakos, K.G.; Busato, P.; Moshou, D.; Pearson, S.; Bochtis, D. Machine Learning in Agriculture: A Review. Sensors 2018, 18, 2674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kamilaris, A.; Kartakoullis, A.; Prenafeta-Boldú, F.X. A review on the practice of big data analysis in agriculture. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2017, 143, 23–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onwude, D.I.; Chen, G.; Eke-emezie, N.; Kabutey, A.; Khaled, A.Y.; Sturm, B. Recent Advances in Reducing Food Losses in the Supply Chain of Fresh Agricultural Produce. Processes 2020, 8, 1431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saiz-Rubio, V.; Rovira-Más, F. From Smart Farming towards Agriculture 5.0: A Review on Crop Data Management. Agronomy 2020, 10, 207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Camaréna, S. Artificial intelligence in the design of the transitions to sustainable food systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 271, 122574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Griffis, S.E.; Bell, J.E.; Closs, D.J. Metaheuristics in Logistics and Supply Chain Management. J. Bus. Logist. 2012, 33, 90–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wari, E.; Zhu, W. A survey on metaheuristics for optimization in food manufacturing industry. Appl. Soft Comput. 2016, 46, 328–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Environmental Sustainability Vision Towards 2030: Achievements, Challenges and Opportunities. 2012. Available online: www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/20931680/environmental-sustainability-vision-towards-2030-fooddrinkeurope (accessed on 30 September 2010).
- OECD-FAO. OECD-FAO Guidance for Responsible Agricultural Supply Chains; OECD: Paris, France, 2016; p. 88. [Google Scholar]
- Sharma, R.; Kamble, S.S.; Gunasekaran, A.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, A. A systematic literature review on machine learning applications for sustainable agriculture supply chain performance. Comput. Oper. Res. 2020, 119, 104926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borodin, V.; Bourtembourg, J.; Hnaien, F.; Labadie, N. Handling uncertainty in agricultural supply chain management: A state of the art. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2016, 254, 348–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dethier, J.J.; Effenberger, A. Agriculture and development: A brief review of the literature. Econ. Syst. 2012, 36, 175–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Føre, M.; Frank, K.; Norton, T.; Svendsen, E.; Alfredsen, J.A.; Dempster, T.; Eguiraun, H.; Watson, W.; Stahl, A.; Sunde, L.M.; et al. Precision fish farming: A new framework to improve production in aquaculture. Biosyst. Eng. 2018, 173, 176–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sundrum, A. Organic livestock farming: A critical review. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2001, 67, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamble, S.S.; Gunasekaran, A.; Gawankar, S.A. Achieving sustainable performance in a data-driven agriculture supply chain: A review for research and applications. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 219, 179–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jordan, M.I.; Mitchell, T.M. Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science 2015, 349, 255–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hinton, G.; Sejnowski, T.J. Unsupervised Learning: Foundations of Neural Computation; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Stephen, M. Machine Learning: An Algorithmic Perspective; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Charte, D.; Charte, F.; García, S.; Herrera, F. A snapshot on nonstandard supervised learning problems: Taxonomy, relationships, problem transformations and algorithm adaptations. Prog. Artif. Intell. 2019, 8, 2192–6360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jain, A.; Duin, R.; Mao, J. Statistical pattern recognition: A review. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2000, 22, 4–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fukunaga, K. Introduction to Statistical Pattern Recognition, 2nd ed.; Academic Press Professional, Inc.: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Duda, R.O.; Hart, P.E.; Stork, D.G.; Duda, C.R.O.; Hart, P.E.; Stork, D.G. Pattern Classification, 2nd ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Smola, A.J.; Schölkopf, B. On a Kernel-Based Method for Pattern Recognition, Regression, Approximation, and Operator Inversion. Algorithmica 1998, 22, 211–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaafra, Y.; Luc Laurent, J.; Deruyver, A.; Saber Naceur, M. Reinforcement learning for neural architecture search: A review. Image Vis. Comput. 2019, 89, 57–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, M.E.; Stone, P. Behavior Transfer for Value-Function-Based Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 25–29 July 2005; pp. 53–59. [Google Scholar]
- Sewak, M. Policy-Based Reinforcement Learning Approaches. In Deep Reinforcement Learning: Frontiers of Artificial Intelligence; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 127–140. [Google Scholar]
- Ray, S.; Tadepalli, P. Model-Based Reinforcement Learning. In Encyclopedia of Machine Learning; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 690–693. [Google Scholar]
- Pouyanfar, S.; Sadiq, S.; Yan, Y.; Tian, H.; Tao, Y.; Reyes, M.P.; Shyu, M.L.; Chen, S.C.; Iyengar, S.S. A Survey on Deep Learning: Algorithms, Techniques, and Applications. ACM Comput. Surv. 2018, 51, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- LeCun, Y.; Bengio, Y.; Hinton, G. Deep learning. Nature 2015, 521, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, L.; Ouyang, W.; Wang, X.; Fieguth, P.; Chen, J.; Liu, X.; Pietikäinen, M. Deep Learning for Generic Object Detection: A Survey. Int. J. Comput. Vis. 2020, 128, 261–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deng, L.; Liu, Y. Deep Learning in Natural Language Processing, 1st ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Schmidhuber, J. Deep learning in neural networks: An overview. Neural Netw. 2015, 61, 85–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Dargan, S.; Kumar, M.; Ayyagari, M.R.; Kumar, G. A Survey of Deep Learning and Its Applications: A New Paradigm to Machine Learning. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2020, 27, 1071–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bianchi, L.; Dorigo, M.; Gambardella, L.M.; Gutjahr, W.J. A survey on metaheuristics for stochastic combinatorial optimization. Nat. Comput. 2009, 8, 239–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Blum, C.; Roli, A. Metaheuristics in Combinatorial Optimization: Overview and Conceptual Comparison. ACM Comput. Surv. 2003, 35, 268–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foster, J.A. Evolutionary computation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2001, 2, 428–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chakraborty, A.; Kar, A.K. Swarm Intelligence: A Review of Algorithms. In Nature-Inspired Computing and Optimization: Theory and Applications; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 475–494. [Google Scholar]
- Stefan, V.; Silvano, M.; Osman, I.H.; Cathérine, R. Advances and Trends in Local Search Paradigms for Optimization, 1st ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Bektas, T. The multiple traveling salesman problem: An overview of formulations and solution procedures. Omega 2006, 34, 209–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katoch, S.; Chauhan, S.S.; Kumar, V. A review on genetic algorithm: Past, present, and future. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2021, 80, 8091–8126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Storn, R.; Price, K. Differential Evolution—A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces. J. Glob. Optim. 1997, 11, 341–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stutzle, T.; Dorigo, M. Ant Colony Optimization, 1st ed.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Kennedy, J.; Eberhart, R. Particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Neural Networks, Perth, Australia, 27 November –1 December 1995; pp. 1942–1948. [Google Scholar]
- Glover, F. Tabu Search—Part I. ORSA J. Comput. 1989, 1, 190–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Feo, T.A.; Resende, M.G.C. Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedures. J. Glob. Optim. 1995, 1995, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Biacino, L.; Gerla, G. Fuzzy logic, continuity and effectiveness. Arch. Math. Log. 2002, 41, 643–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cox, E. The Fuzzy Systems Handbook: A Practitioner’s Guide to Building, Using, and Maintaining Fuzzy Systems; Academic Press Professional, Inc.: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Ghahramani, Z. Bayesian non-parametrics and the probabilistic approach to modelling. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2013, 371, 20110553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ghahramani, Z. Probabilistic machine learning and artificial intelligence. Nature 2015, 521, 452–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borgelt, C.; Steinbrecher, M.; Kruse, R.R. Graphical Models: Representations for Learning, Reasoning and Data Mining, 2nd ed.; Wiley Publishing: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Rue, H.; Held, L. Gaussian Markov Random Fields: Theory and Applications, 1st ed.; Chapman and Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Aquaculture. 2021. Available online: www.fao.org/documents/card/es/c/cb4850en/ (accessed on 3 August 2021).
- Konovalov, D.A.; Saleh, A.; Efremova, D.B.; Domingos, J.A.; Jerry, D.R. Automatic Weight Estimation of Harvested Fish from Images. In Proceedings of the 2019 Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA), Perth, Australia, 2–4 December 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, X.; Zhang, S.; Liu, J.; Gao, Q.; Dong, S.; Zhou, C. Deep learning for smart fish farming: Applications, opportunities and challenges. Rev. Aquac. 2021, 13, 66–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taskiner, T.; Bilgen, B. Optimization Models for Harvest and Production Planning in Agri-Food Supply Chain: A Systematic Review. Logistics 2021, 5, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, Y.; Xu, H.; Yan, L. Support vector machine-based open crop model (SBOCM): Case of rice production in China. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2017, 24, 537–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pantazi, X.; Moshou, D.; Alexandridis, T.; Whetton, R.; Mouazen, A. Wheat yield prediction using machine learning and advanced sensing techniques. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2016, 121, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sambasivam, G.; Opiyo, G.D. A predictive machine learning application in agriculture: Cassava disease detection and classification with imbalanced dataset using convolutional neural networks. Egypt. Inform. J. 2021, 22, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jan, B.; Anne-Katrin, M.; Till, R.; Christoph, R.; Lutz, P. A review of advanced machine learning methods for the detection of biotic stress in precision crop protection. Precis. Agric. 2015, 16, 1573–1618. [Google Scholar]
- Romero, M.; Luo, Y.; Su, B.; Fuentes, S. Vineyard water status estimation using multispectral imagery from an UAV platform and machine learning algorithms for irrigation scheduling management. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2018, 147, 109–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Traore, S.; Luo, Y.; Fipps, G. Deployment of artificial neural network for short-term forecasting of evapotranspiration using public weather forecast restricted messages. Agric. Water Manag. 2016, 163, 363–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sirsat, M.; Cernadas, E.; Fernández-Delgado, M.; Barro, S. Automatic prediction of village-wise soil fertility for several nutrients in India using a wide range of regression methods. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2018, 154, 120–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coopersmith, E.J.; Minsker, B.S.; Wenzel, C.E.; Gilmore, B.J. Machine learning assessments of soil drying for agricultural planning. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2014, 104, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barrett, B.; Nitze, I.; Green, S.; Cawkwell, F. Assessment of multi-temporal, multi-sensor radar and ancillary spatial data for grasslands monitoring in Ireland using machine learning approaches. Remote Sens. Environ. 2014, 152, 109–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vinicius, P.; Zen, K.L.; Rocha, P.C.S.; Rafael, C.; Da Silva, J.C.C.; José, K.H.; Richardson, R.; Luiz, B.F.; Simioni, A.T. In vivo pattern classification of ingestive behavior in ruminants using FBG sensors and machine learning. Sensors 2015, 15, 28456–28471. [Google Scholar]
- Matthews, S.G.; Miller, A.L.; PlÖtz, T.; Kyriazakis, I. Automated tracking to measure behavioural changes in pigs for health and welfare monitoring. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 2045–2322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso, J.; Villa, A.; Bahamonde, A. Improved estimation of bovine weight trajectories using Support Vector Machine Classification. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2015, 110, 36–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Craninx, M.; Fievez, V.; Vlaeminck, B.; De Baets, B. Artificial neural network models of the rumen fermentation pattern in dairy cattle. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2008, 60, 226–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erik, H.; Emanuel, R. Big data analytics and demand forecasting in supply chains: A conceptual analysis. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2018, 29, 2. [Google Scholar]
- Feng, Q.; Shanthikumar, J.G. How Research in Production and Operations Management May Evolve in the Era of Big Data. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2018, 27, 1670–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Purandare, H.; Ketkar, N.; Pansare, S.; Padhye, P.; Ghotkar, A. Analysis of post-harvest losses: An Internet of Things and machine learning approach. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Automatic Control and Dynamic Optimization Techniques, Pune, India, 9–10 September 2016; pp. 222–226. [Google Scholar]
- Banga, J.R.; Balsa-Canto, E.; Moles, C.G.; Alonso, A.A. Improving food processing using modern optimization methods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2003, 14, 131–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eneko, O.; Yang, X.S.; Fernando, D.; Enrique, O.; Masegosa, A.D.; Asier, P. A discrete firefly algorithm to solve a rich vehicle routing problem modelling a newspaper distribution system with recycling policy. Soft Comput. 2017, 21, 1433–7479. [Google Scholar]
- Nasr, N.; Niaki, S.T.A.; Hussenzadek Kashan, A.; Seifbarghy, M. An efficient solution method for an agri-fresh food supply chain: Hybridization of Lagrangian relaxation and genetic algorithm. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hui, Y.Y.; Choy, K.; Ho, G.; Leung, K.; Lam, H. A cloud-based location assignment system for packaged food allocation in e-fulfillment warehouse. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2016, 8, 1847979016684832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mosallanezhad, B.; Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M.; Triki, C. Shrimp closed-loop supply chain network design. Soft Comput. 2021, 25, 7399–7422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luangkesorn, K.; Klein, G.; Bidanda, B. Analysis of production systems with potential for severe disruptions. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 171, 478–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lestari, F.; Mas’ari, A.; Meilani, S.; Riandika, I.N.; Hamid, A.B.A. Risk Mitigation Via Integrating House of Risk and Probability Impact Matrix in Halal Food Supply Chain. J. Tek. Ind. 2021, 22, 138–154. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Addepalli, S. Remaining Useful Life Prediction using Deep Learning Approaches: A Review. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 49, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brooks, C.; Parr, L.; Smith, J.M.; Buchanan, D.; Snioch, D.; Hebishy, E. A review of food fraud and food authenticity across the food supply chain, with an examination of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit on food industry. Food Control 2021, 130, 108171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shahbazi, Z.; Byun, Y.C. A Procedure for Tracing Supply Chains for Perishable Food Based on Blockchain, Machine Learning and Fuzzy Logic. Electronics 2021, 10, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feizabadi, J. Machine learning demand forecasting and supply chain performance. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2020, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bányai, T. Real-Time Decision Making in First Mile and Last Mile Logistics: How Smart Scheduling Affects Energy Efficiency of Hyperconnected Supply Chain Solutions. Energies 2018, 11, 1833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vasiloglou, M.F.; Mougiakakou, S.; Aubry, E.; Bokelmann, A.; Fricker, R.; Gomes, F.; Guntermann, C.; Meyer, A.; Studerus, D.; Stanga, Z. A Comparative Study on Carbohydrate Estimation: GoCARB vs. Dietitians. Nutrients 2018, 10, 741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eftimov, T.; Korosec, P.; Korousić Seljak, B. StandFood: Standardization of Foods Using a Semi-Automatic System for Classifying and Describing Foods According to FoodEx2. Nutrients 2017, 10, 542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grainger, M.J.; Aramyan, L.; Logatcheva, K.; Piras, S.; Righi, S.; Setti, M.; Vittuari, M.; Stewart, G.B. The use of systems models to identify food waste drivers. Glob. Food Secur. 2018, 16, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bonaccorsi, M.; Betti, S.; Rateni, G.; Esposito, D.; Brischetto, A.; Marseglia, M.; Dario, P.; Cavallo, F. ‘HighChest’: An Augmented Freezer Designed for Smart Food Management and Promotion of Eco-Efficient Behaviour. Sensors 2017, 17, 1357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Borimnejad, V.; Samani, R.E. Modeling consumer’s behavior for packed vegetable in “Mayadin management organization of Tehran” using artificial neural network. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2016, 3, 1208898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cene, E.; Karaman, F. Analysing organic food buyers’ perceptions with Bayesian networks: A case study in Turkey. J. Appl. Stat. 2015, 42, 1572–1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- CEPS. Digitising Agrifood—Pathways and Challenges. 2019. Available online: www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/digitising-agrifood. (accessed on 3 October 2021).
- Sipser, M. Introduction to the Theory of Computation. Available online: http://fuuu.be/polytech/INFOF408/Introduction-To-The-Theory-Of-Computation-Michael-Sipser.pdf (accessed on 3 October 2021).
- Nesteruk, S.; Shadrin, D.; Pukalchik, M.; Somov, A.; Zeidler, C.; Zabel, P.; Schubert, D. Image Compression and Plants Classification Using Machine Learning in Controlled-Environment Agriculture: Antarctic Station Use Case. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 17564–17572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iqbal, M.A.; Wang, Z.; Ali, Z.A.; Riaz, S. Automatic Fish Species Classification Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2021, 116, 1043–1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrellis, N. Measurement of Fish Morphological Features through Image Processing and Deep Learning Techniques. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 4416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, D.H.; Kim, N.Y.; Moon, S.H.; Jhin, C.; Kim, H.J.; Yang, J.S.; Kim, H.S.; Lee, T.S.; Lee, J.Y.; Park, S.H. Deep Learning-Based Cattle Vocal Classification Model and Real-Time Livestock Monitoring System with Noise Filtering. Animals 2021, 11, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, Y.J.; Park, D.H.; Park, H.; Kim, S.H. Pig Datasets of Livestock for Deep Learning to detect Posture using Surveillance Camera. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence, Jeju, Korea, 21–23 October 2020; pp. 1196–1198. [Google Scholar]
- Qiao, Y.; Su, D.; Kong, H.; Sukkarieh, S.; Lomax, S.; Clark, C. Data Augmentation for Deep Learning based Cattle Segmentation in Precision Livestock Farming. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, Hong Kong, China, 20–21 August 2020; pp. 979–984. [Google Scholar]
- Qiao, Y.; Truman, M.; Sukkarieh, S. Cattle segmentation and contour extraction based on Mask R-CNN for precision livestock farming. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2019, 165, 104958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, S.; Zhang, S.; Liu, J.; Wang, H.; Zhu, J.; Li, D.; Zhao, R. Application of machine learning in intelligent fish aquaculture: A review. Aquaculture 2021, 540, 724–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, G.; Xiao, K.; Chen, M. An intelligent IoT-based control and traceability system to forecast and maintain water quality in freshwater fish farms. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2019, 166, 105013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopes, B.D.M.; Silva, L.C.B.; Blanquet, I.M.; Georgieva, P.; Marques, C.A.F. Prediction of fish mortality based on a probabilistic anomaly detection approach for recirculating aquaculture system facilities. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2021, 92, 025119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strabel, T.; Szyda, J.; Ptak, E.; Jamrozik, J. Comparison of Random Regression Test-Day Models for Polish Black and White Cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2005, 88, 3688–3699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bayer, P.E.; Edwards, D. Machine learning in agriculture: From silos to marketplaces. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2021, 19, 648–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozguven, M.M.; Adem, K. Automatic detection and classification of leaf spot disease in sugar beet using deep learning algorithms. Phys. A Stat. Mech. Appl. 2019, 535, 122537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bah, M.D.; Dericquebourg, E.; Hafiane, A.; Canals, R. Deep Learning Based Classification System for Identifying Weeds Using High-Resolution UAV Imagery. In Intelligent Computing; Arai, K., Kapoor, S., Bhatia, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 176–187. [Google Scholar]
- Chlingaryan, A.; Sukkarieh, S.; Whelan, B. Machine learning approaches for crop yield prediction and nitrogen status estimation in precision agriculture: A review. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2018, 151, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, L.; Huang, G.; Fan, J.; Ma, X.; Zhou, H.; Zeng, W. Hybrid extreme learning machine with meta-heuristic algorithms for monthly pan evaporation prediction. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2020, 168, 105115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kong, Q.; Kuriyan, K.; Shah, N.; Guo, M. Development of a responsive optimisation framework for decision-making in precision agriculture. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2019, 131, 106585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valente, J.; Del Cerro, J.; Barrientos, A.; Sanz, D. Aerial coverage optimization in precision agriculture management: A musical harmony inspired approach. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2013, 99, 153–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Remya, S.; Sasikala, R. Performance evaluation of optimized and adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system for predictive modeling in agriculture. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2020, 86, 106718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giusti, E.; Marsili-Libelli, S. A Fuzzy Decision Support System for irrigation and water conservation in agriculture. Environ. Model. Softw. 2015, 63, 73–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papageorgiou, E.; Markinos, A.; Gemtos, T. Fuzzy cognitive map based approach for predicting yield in cotton crop production as a basis for decision support system in precision agriculture application. Appl. Soft Comput. 2011, 11, 3643–3657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dilkhush Mihirsen, D.; Joseph, J.T.; Renisha, B. Time Series Analysis for Supply Chain Planning in Restaurants. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing, Communication and Security, Patna, India, 14–16 October 2020; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Sadati, N.; Chinnam, R.B.; Nezhad, M.Z. Observational data-driven modeling and optimization of manufacturing processes. Expert Syst. Appl. 2018, 93, 456–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jonkman, J.; Bloemhof, J.M.; van der Vorst, J.G.; van der Padt, A. Selecting food process designs from a supply chain perspective. J. Food Eng. 2017, 195, 52–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ekin, T. Integrated maintenance and production planning with endogenous uncertain yield. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2018, 179, 52–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graves, S.C. Uncertainty and Production Planning. In Planning Production and Inventories in the Extended Enterprise: A State of the Art Handbook, Volume 1; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 83–101. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, R.Q.; Wang, M.; Pan, X. New model of the storage location assignment problem considering demand correlation pattern. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2019, 129, 210–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldi, M.M.; Manerba, D.; Perboli, G.; Tadei, R. A Generalized Bin Packing Problem for parcel delivery in last-mile logistics. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2019, 274, 990–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, K.; Ardiansyah, M.N. A decision model for last-mile delivery planning with crowdsourcing integration. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2019, 135, 898–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mummoorthy, A.; Mohanasundaram, R.; Saraff, S.; Arun, R. Fleet Management and Vehicle Routing in Real Time Using Parallel Computing Algorithms. In Soft Computing and Signal Processing; Wang, J., Reddy, G.R.M., Prasad, V.K., Reddy, V.S., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 263–270. [Google Scholar]
- Goel, R.; Maini, R. A hybrid of ant colony and firefly algorithms (HAFA) for solving vehicle routing problems. J. Comput. Sci. 2018, 25, 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goel, R.; Maini, R. A survey of machine learning techniques for food sales prediction. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2018, 52, 441–447. [Google Scholar]
- Baryannis, G.; Dani, S.; Antoniou, G. Predicting supply chain risks using machine learning: The trade-off between performance and interpretability. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 101, 993–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baryannis, G.; Dani, S.; Validi, S.; Antoniou, G. Decision Support Systems and Artificial Intelligence in Supply Chain Risk Management. In Revisiting Supply Chain Risk; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 53–71. [Google Scholar]
- Baryannis, G.; Validi, S.; Dani, S.; Antoniou, G. Supply chain risk management and artificial intelligence: State of the art and future research directions. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 2179–2202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morris, S.; Conn Welch, K.; Schroeder, M. Inventory Management of the Refrigerator’s Produce Bins Using Classification Algorithms and Hand Analysis. In Proceedings of the IEEE SoutheastCon 2021, Virtual Conference, 10–14 March 2021; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Runzel, M.A.S.; Hassler, E.E.; Rogers, R.E.L.; Formato, G.; Cazier, J.A. Designing a Smart Honey Supply Chain for Sustainable Development. IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag. 2021, 10, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kudo, T. A Proposal for Article Management Method Using Wearable Camera. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020, 176, 1338–1347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, L.; Kamat, V.R.; Menassa, C.C. Automatic extraction of 1D barcodes from video scans for drone-assisted inventory management in warehousing applications. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2018, 21, 243–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunawardena, D.; Sarathchandra, K. BestDish: A Digital Menu and Food Item Recommendation System for Restaurants in the Hotel Sector. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Image Processing and Robotics, Abu Dabi, United Arab Emirates, 25–28 October 2020; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Chiciudean, G.O.; Harun, R.; Ilea, M.; Chiciudean, D.I.; Arion, F.H.; Ilies, G.; Muresan, I.C. Organic Food Consumers and Purchase Intention: A Case Study in Romania. Agronomy 2019, 9, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Priore, P.; Ponte, B.; Rosillo, R.; de la Fuente, D. Applying machine learning to the dynamic selection of replenishment policies in fast-changing supply chain environments. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 3663–3677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tangtisanon, P. Web Service Based Food Additive Inventory Management with Forecasting System. In Proceedings of the 2018 3rd International Conference on Computer and Communication Systems (ICCCS), Nagoya, Japan, 27–30 April 2018; pp. 448–452. [Google Scholar]
- Maihami, R.; Govindan, K.; Fattahi, M. The inventory and pricing decisions in a three-echelon supply chain of deteriorating items under probabilistic environment. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2019, 131, 118–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cevallos-Torres, L.; Botto-Tobar, M. Case Study: Probabilistic Estimates in the Application of Inventory Models for Perishable Products in SMEs. In Problem-Based Learning: A Didactic Strategy in the Teaching of System Simulation; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 123–132. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Y.; Hua, G.; Wang, S.; Zhang, J.; Fernandez, V. Managing demand uncertainty: Probabilistic selling versus inventory substitution. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 196, 56–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, L.; Li, F.; Li, C.; Wang, Y.; Qian, X.; Feng, T.; Wang, C. Inventory Optimization of Fresh Agricultural Products Supply Chain Based on Agricultural Superdocking. J. Adv. Transp. 2020, 2020, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fathi, M.; Nourmohammadi, A.; Ghobakhloo, M.; Yousefi, M. Production Sustainability via Supermarket Location Optimization in Assembly Lines. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Ma, X.; Shu, L.; Hancke, G.P.; Abu-Mahfouz, A.M. From Industry 4.0 to Agriculture 4.0: Current Status, Enabling Technologies, and Research Challenges. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021, 17, 4322–4334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Araujo, S.O.; Peres, R.S.; Barata, J.; Lidon, F.; Ramalho, J.C. Characterising the Agriculture 4.0 Landscape—Emerging Trends, Challenges and Opportunities. Agronomy 2021, 11, 667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moysiadis, T.; Adamides, G.; Stylianou, A.; Zotos, N.; Giannakopoulou, M.; Alexiou, G. Use of IoT technologies for irrigation and plant protection: The case for Cypriot fruits and vegetables. In Bio-Economy and Agri-Production; Bochtis, D., Achillas, C., Banias, G., Lampridi, M., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 175–194. [Google Scholar]
- Serazetdinova, L.; Garratt, J.; Baylis, A.; Stergiadis, S.; Collison, M.; Davis, S. How should we turn data into decisions in AgriFood? J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019, 99, 3213–3219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brewster, C.; Roussaki, I.; Kalatzis, N.; Doolin, K.; Ellis, K. IoT in Agriculture: Designing a Europe-Wide Large-Scale Pilot. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia, S.; Luengo, J.; Herrera, F. Data Preprocessing in Data Mining; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Chefrour, A. Incremental supervised learning: Algorithms and applications in pattern recognition. Evol. Intell. 2019, 12, 97–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Wang, L.; Ye, Y.; Liu, Z.; Guo, Y.; Fu, Y. Large Scale Incremental Learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Long Beach, CA, USA, 15–20 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Castro, F.M.; Marin-Jimenez, M.J.; Guil, N.; Schmid, C.; Alahari, K. End-to-End Incremental Learning. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), Munich, Germany, 8–14 September 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ditzler, G.; Roveri, M.; Alippi, C.; Polikar, R. Learning in Nonstationary Environments: A Survey. IEEE Comput. Intell. Mag. 2015, 10, 12–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polikar, R.; Upda, L.; Upda, S.; Honavar, V. Learn++: An incremental learning algorithm for supervised neural networks. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C (Appl. Rev.) 2001, 31, 497–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Agarwal, S.; Rattani, A.; Chowdary, C.R. AILearn: An Adaptive Incremental Learning Model for Spoof Fingerprint Detection. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2012.14639. [Google Scholar]
- Goodman, B.; Flaxman, S. European Union Regulations on Algorithmic Decision-Making and a “Right to Explanation”. AI Mag. 2017, 38, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Castelvecchi, D. Can we open the black box of AI? Nature 2016, 538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gunning, D.; Aha, D. DARPA’s Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) Program. AI Mag. 2019, 40, 44–58. [Google Scholar]
- Barredo Arrieta, A.; Díaz-Rodríguez, N.; Del Ser, J.; Bennetot, A.; Tabik, S.; Barbado, A.; Garcia, S.; Gil-Lopez, S.; Molina, D.; Benjamins, R.; et al. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Inf. Fusion 2020, 58, 82–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wolpert, D.H.; Macready, W.G. No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 1997, 1, 67–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Osaba, E.; Villar-Rodriguez, E.; Del Ser, J.; Nebro, A.J.; Molina, D.; LaTorre, A.; Suganthan, P.N.; Coello Coello, C.A.; Herrera, F. A Tutorial On the design, experimentation and application of metaheuristic algorithms to real-World optimization problems. Swarm Evol. Comput. 2021, 64, 100888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hutter, F.; Kotthoff, L.; Vanschoren, J. (Eds.) Automated Machine Learning: Methods, Systems, Challenges; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmer, L.; Lindauer, M.; Hutter, F. Auto-PyTorch Tabular: Multi-Fidelity MetaLearning for Efficient and Robust AutoDLL. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2006.13799. [Google Scholar]
- Angarita-Zapata, J.S.; Masegosa, A.D.; Triguero, I. General-Purpose Automated Machine Learning for Transportation: A Case Study of Auto-sklearn for Traffic Forecasting. In Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems; Lesot, M.J., Vieira, S., Reformat, M.Z., Carvalho, J.P., Wilbik, A., Bouchon-Meunier, B., Yager, R.R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 728–744. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Z.; Guo, H.; Wang, W.M.; Guan, Y.; Barenji, A.V.; Huang, G.Q.; McFall, K.S.; Chen, X. A Blockchain and AutoML Approach for Open and Automated Customer Service. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2019, 15, 3642–3651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeid, A.; Sundaram, S.; Moghaddam, M.; Kamarthi, S.; Marion, T. Interoperability in Smart Manufacturing: Research Challenges. Machines 2019, 7, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bhatia, M.; Ahanger, T.A. Intelligent decision-making in Smart Food Industry: Quality perspective. Pervasive Mob. Comput. 2021, 72, 101304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burns, T.; Cosgrove, J.; Doyle, F. A Review of Interoperability Standards for Industry 4.0. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 38, 646–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nilsson, J.; Sandin, F. Semantic Interoperability in Industry 4.0: Survey of Recent Developments and Outlook. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), Porto, Portugal, 18–20 July 2018; pp. 127–132. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, X.V.; Wang, L.; Givehchi, M. ICMS: A Cloud-Based System for Production Management. In Advances in Production Management Systems: Innovative Production Management Towards Sustainable Growth; Umeda, S., Nakano, M., Mizuyama, H., Hibino, H., Kiritsis, D., von Cieminski, G., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 444–451. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, Y.; Xu, X.; Xu, J. Development of a Hybrid Manufacturing Cloud. J. Manuf. Syst. 2014, 33, 551–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, B.; Chai, X.; Hou, B.; Zhang, L.; Zhou, J.; Liu, Y. New Generation Artificial Intelligence-Driven Intelligent Manufacturing (NGAIIM). In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intelligence Computing, Advanced Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing Communications, Cloud Big Data Computing, Internet of People and Smart City Innovation (SmartWorld/SCALCOM/UIC/ATC/CBDCom/IOP/SCI), Guangzhou, China, 8–12 October 2018; pp. 1864–1869. [Google Scholar]
- Perez-Pons, M.E.; Plaza-Hernández, M.; Alonso, R.S.; Parra-Domínguez, J.; Prieto, J. Increasing Profitability and Monitoring Environmental Performance: A Case Study in the Agri-Food Industry through an Edge-IoT Platform. Sustainability 2021, 13, 283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Qu, X.; Sangaiah, A.K. A Study of Green Development Mode and Total Factor Productivity of the Food Industry Based on the Industrial Internet of Things. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2018, 56, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso, R.S.; Sittón-Candanedo, I.; García, Ó.; Prieto, J.; Rodríguez-González, S. An intelligent Edge-IoT platform for monitoring livestock and crops in a dairy farming scenario. Ad Hoc Netw. 2020, 98, 102047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chalapathi, G.S.S.; Chamola, V.; Vaish, A.; Buyya, R. Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) Applications of Edge and Fog Computing: A Review and Future Directions; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 293–325. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, N.; Rodrigues, J.J.P.C.; Guizani, M.; Choo, K.K.R.; Lu, R.; Verikoukis, C.; Zhong, Z. Achieving Energy Efficiency and Sustainability in Edge/Fog Deployment. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2018, 56, 20–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
CI Approach | Strengths | Weaknesses |
---|---|---|
CI-based statistical learning methods | - Expert knowledge of the problem domain where they are applied is not required. - No assumptions about the characteristics of the data available (non-parametric method) are made. - They can work properly with medium and large sized datasets. | - Expert Statistical Learning knowledge is required. - Their performance is highly dependent on the quality and availability of data. - They have problems finding meaningful representations of the data when the complexity of hidden patterns of the data is very high (e.g., computer vision). |
Artificial neural networks and Deep learning | - Expert knowledge of the problem is not required domain where they are applied. - No assumptions about the characteristics of the data available (non-parametric method). - They can extract complex and non-linear patterns embedded in data. - Work directly on raw data without almost any need for feature extraction. | - Expert Statistical Learning knowledge is required. - High volumes of data are required. - High computational capabilities are needed. |
CI-based optimization methods | - Satisfactory solutions for complex problems. - They can work in scenarios with time and computational capabilities defined by the user. | - They are approximate methods, so an optimal solution is not guaranteed. - Expert knowledge is required for the design of the methods. |
Fuzzy systems | - The methods are capable of modeling impressions and vagueness associated with the data of the problem domain. - The results are easily interpretable. | - Expert knowledge associated with the problem domain is required. - Not able to deal effectively with uncertainty associated with the data available. |
Probabilistic Reasoning | - Able to deal with high levels of uncertainty in the data available. | - Unable to deal with complex problems characterized by data representing different variables of interest. - Difficulties in modeling ambiguities and inaccuracies in the input data. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Angarita-Zapata, J.S.; Alonso-Vicario, A.; Masegosa, A.D.; Legarda, J. A Taxonomy of Food Supply Chain Problems from a Computational Intelligence Perspective. Sensors 2021, 21, 6910. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206910
Angarita-Zapata JS, Alonso-Vicario A, Masegosa AD, Legarda J. A Taxonomy of Food Supply Chain Problems from a Computational Intelligence Perspective. Sensors. 2021; 21(20):6910. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206910
Chicago/Turabian StyleAngarita-Zapata, Juan S., Ainhoa Alonso-Vicario, Antonio D. Masegosa, and Jon Legarda. 2021. "A Taxonomy of Food Supply Chain Problems from a Computational Intelligence Perspective" Sensors 21, no. 20: 6910. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206910
APA StyleAngarita-Zapata, J. S., Alonso-Vicario, A., Masegosa, A. D., & Legarda, J. (2021). A Taxonomy of Food Supply Chain Problems from a Computational Intelligence Perspective. Sensors, 21(20), 6910. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206910