Advances in precision agriculture in south-eastern Australia. II. Spatio-temporal prediction of crop yield using terrain derivatives and proximally sensed data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of seasonal as well as spatial variability in yield maps for precision farming are poorly understood, and as a consequence may lead to low predictability of future crop yield. The potential to utilise terrain derivatives and proximally sensed datasets to improve this situation was explored. Yield data for four seasons between 1996 and 2005, proximal datasets including EM38, EM31, and ?-ray spectra for 2003–06, were collected from a site near Birchip. Elevation data were obtained from a Differential Global Positioning System and terrain derivatives were formulated. Yield zones developed from grain yield data and yield biomass estimations were included in this analysis. Statistical analysis methods, including spatial regression modelling, discriminant analysis via canonical variates analysis, and Bayesian spatial modelling, were undertaken to examine predictive capabilities of these datasets. Modelling of proximal data in association with crop yield found that EM38h, EM38v, and ?-ray total count were significantly correlated with yield for all seasons, while the terrain derivatives, relative elevation, slope, and elevation, were associated with yield for one season (1996, 1998, or 2005) only. Terrain derivatives, aspect, and profile and planimetric curvature were not associated with yield. Modest predictions of crop yield were established using these variables for the 1996 yield, while poor predictions were established in modelling yield zones.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".