MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965621293 · doi:10.1017/s0021859612001098

A comparative study between non-linear regression and artificial neural network approaches for modelling wild oat (<i>Avena fatua</i>) field emergence

2013· article· en· W1965621293 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Agricultural Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAvena fatuaArtificial neural networkBivariate analysisWeibull distributionLinear regressionUnivariateStatisticsComputer scienceWeedMathematicsMultivariate statisticsEcologyMachine learningBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Non-linear regression (NLR) techniques are used widely to fit weed field emergence patterns to soil microclimatic indices using S-type functions. Artificial neural networks (ANNs) present interesting and alternative features for such modelling purposes. In the present work, a univariate hydrothermal-time based Weibull model and a bivariate (hydro-time and thermal-time) ANN were developed to study wild oat emergence under non-moisture restriction conditions using data from different locations worldwide. Results indicated a higher accuracy of the neural network in comparison with the NLR approach due to the improved descriptive capacity of thermal-time and the hydro-time as independent explanatory variables. The bivariate ANN model outperformed the conventional Weibull approach, in terms of RMSE of the test set, by 70·8%. These outcomes suggest the potential applicability of the proposed modelling approach in the design of weed management decision support systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it