MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120461939 · doi:10.5539/sar.v2n4p12

Spatial Distribution of Calibrated WOFOST Parameters and Their Influence on the Performances of a Regional Yield orecasting System

2013· article· en· W2120461939 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Bakary Djaby, Allard de Wit, Louis Kouadio, Moussa El Jarroudi, Bernard Tychon

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Agriculture Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersBelgian Federal Science Policy Office
KeywordsAnthesisEnvironmental scienceCropYield (engineering)Crop yieldSpatial distributionBaseline (sea)Spatial variabilityAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyPhysical geographyAgronomyGeographyMathematicsStatisticsGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate in this study (i) a redefinition of crop variety zonations at a spatial scale of 10x10 km, and (ii) the influence of recalibrated crop parameters on regional yield forecasting of winter wheat and grain maize in western Europe. The baseline zonation and initial crop parameter set was derived from the operational European crop growth monitoring system (CGMS) which involves the agrometeorological model WOFOST. Air temperature data from 325 weather stations over the 1992-2007 period were used to define new zonations in a 300 x 300 km test site. Two parameters which influenced mostly the phenological development stages (i.e. TSUM1 and TSUM2, the effective air temperature sums from emergence to anthesis, and from anthesis to maturity, respectively) were chosen and calibrated. The CGMS was finally run based on these new recalibrated parameters and simulated crop status indicators were compared with official statistics over the 2000-2007 period. Our results showed that the days of anthesis and maturity were simulated with coefficients of determination (R2) ranging from 0.22 to 0.87 for both crops over the study site. A qualitative assessment of maximum leaf area index and harvest index also revealed a more consistent spatial pattern than the initial zonation in the simulation results. Finally, recalibrated TSUM1 and TSUM2 led to improved relationships between official yield and simulated crop indicators (significant R2 in 17 out of 28 and in 14 out of 59 NUTS3 regions with respect to the best predictor for grain maize and winter wheat, respectively).

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 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 score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable Agriculture ResearchSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207