Tarsius Image-Source Classification Using VGG Feature Extraction and Machine Learning Classifiers

Caecilia Eva Martina Korompis; Imam Yuadi

doi:10.59261/bustechno.v7i4.761

Authors

Caecilia Eva Martina Korompis Universitas Airlangga
Imam Yuadi Universitas Airlangga

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59261/bustechno.v7i4.761

Keywords:

AI-generated Images, Image Classification, InceptionV3, Tarsius, VGG

Abstract

Background: Reliable classification of heterogeneous Tarsius imagery is relevant to digital wildlife-data management, yet real photographs and AI-generated images may share visual characteristics that complicate automated separation.

Objective: This study compares VGG-16, VGG-19, and InceptionV3 feature extraction combined with Logistic Regression and Neural Network classifiers for real, cartoon-style, and AI-generated Tarsius images.

Methods: A balanced dataset of 300 web-sourced images (100 per category) was processed in Orange Data Mining. Performance was evaluated using AUC, classification accuracy (CA), F1-score, precision, recall, Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC), confusion matrices, Multidimensional Scaling (MDS), and silhouette plots.

Results: Logistic Regression with VGG-19 produced the strongest reported combination (AUC = 0.997, CA = 0.967, F1 = 0.967, precision = 0.968, recall = 0.967, and MCC = 0.950), closely followed by VGG-16 with Logistic Regression. Cartoon-style images were generally the most distinguishable, whereas real and AI-generated images showed the greatest overlap. InceptionV3 produced clearer two-dimensional MDS separation but lower aggregate predictive performance than the VGG-based Logistic Regression configurations.

Conclusion: VGG-19 with Logistic Regression provides the most balanced performance for the available dataset. The findings demonstrate that predictive metrics and feature-space visualizations should be interpreted jointly and remain limited by the small, web-sourced dataset and incomplete provenance records.

References

Amjoud, A. B., & Amrouch, M. (2022). Transfer learning for automatic image orientation detection using deep learning and logistic regression. IEEE Access, 10, 128543–128553. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3225455

Bartlett, K. A., & Dorribo Camba, J. (2023). The role of a graphical interpretation factor in the assessment of Spatial Visualization: A critical analysis. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/13875868.2021.2019260

Chicco, D., & Jurman, G. (2020). The advantages of the Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) over F1 score and accuracy in binary classification evaluation. BMC Genomics, 21(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-019-6413-7

Chicco, D., & Jurman, G. (2023). The Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) should replace the ROC AUC as the standard metric for assessing binary classification. BioData Mining, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13040-023-00322-4

Crowley, J. L. (2023). Convolutional Neural Networks. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 13500 LNAI. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24349-3_5

Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. (2016). Deep Learning. MIT Press. https://www.deeplearningbook.org/

Goutte, C., & Gaussier, É. (2005). A probabilistic interpretation of precision, recall and F-score, with implication for evaluation. In D. E. Losada & J. M. Fernández-Luna (Eds.), Advances in Information Retrieval: 27th European Conference on IR Research (ECIR 2005) (Vol. 3408, pp. 345–359). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31865-1_25

Gursky-Doyen, S. (2010). The function of scentmarking in spectral tarsiers. In S. Gursky-Doyen & J. Supriatna (Eds.), Indonesian Primates (pp. 359–369). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1560-3_20

Hagele, D., Krake, T., & Weiskopf, D. (2023). Uncertainty-Aware Multidimensional Scaling. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 29(1). https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2022.3209420

He, K., Gkioxari, G., Dollár, P., & Girshick, R. (2020). Mask R-CNN. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 42(2), 386–397. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2018.2844175

Hidayatik, N., Agil, M., Iskandar, E., Farajallah, D., Khairullah, A., Saputro, S., & Maulana, V. (2025). Behavior of female Tarsius spectrumgurskyae at the primate research center breeding facility. Open Veterinary Journal, 15(5), 2059. https://doi.org/10.5455/OVJ.2025.v15.i5.22

Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied Logistic Regression (3rd ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118548387

IUCN. (2025). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Versión 2025-1). Iucn.

Kruskal, J. B., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional Scaling. SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/multidimensional-scaling/book4259

Nevill, C. R., Cooper, N. J., & Sutton, A. J. (2023). A multifaceted graphical display, including treatment ranking, was developed to aid interpretation of network meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.016

Pearline, S. A., Kumar, V. S., & Harini, S. (2019). A study on plant recognition using conventional image processing and deep learning approaches. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 36(3), 1997–2004. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-169911

Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987). Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0427(87)90125-7

Saito, Y., Omae, Y., Nagashima, K., Miyauchi, K., Nishizaki, Y., Miyazaki, S., Hayashi, H., Nojiri, S., Daida, H., Minamino, T., & Okumura, Y. (2023). Phenotyping of atrial fibrillation with cluster analysis and external validation. Heart, 109(23). https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2023-322447

Samudra, J. T., Rosnelly, R., Situmorang, Z., & Ramadhan, P. S. (2023). Model klasifikasi jenis hewan dengan SVM, KNN, Logistic Regression menggunakan pre-trained VGG 16. Jurnal SAINTIKOM (Jurnal Sains Manajemen Informatika Dan Komputer), 22(2), 225–231. https://doi.org/10.53513/jis.v22i2.8314

Shekelle, M., & Salim. A. (2008). Tarsius tarsier. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008. In IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T21491A9288932.en

Shoaib, M., Hussain, T., Shah, B., Ullah, I., Shah, S. M., Ali, F., & Park, S. H. (2022). Deep learning-based segmentation and classification of leaf images for detection of tomato plant disease. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1031748

Simonyan, K., & Zisserman, A. (2015). Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).

Szegedy, C., Vanhoucke, V., Ioffe, S., Shlens, J., & Wojna, Z. (2016). Rethinking the Inception architecture for computer vision. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2818–2826. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2016.308

Tan, L., Lu, J., & Jiang, H. (2021). Tomato leaf diseases classification based on leaf images: A comparison between classical machine learning and deep learning methods. AgriEngineering, 3(3), 542–558. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriengineering3030035

Yousef, M., & Allmer, J. (2023). Deep learning in bioinformatics. Turkish Journal of Biology, 47(6). https://doi.org/10.55730/1300-0152.2671

Zhu, H., Wang, Y., & Fan, J. (2022). IA-Mask R-CNN: Improved Anchor Design Mask R-CNN for Surface Defect Detection of Automotive Engine Parts. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 12(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136633