Prediction of summer grain crop yield with a process-based ecosystem model and remote sensing data for the northern area of the Jiangsu Province, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Yield prediction is important for agricultural management, food security warning and food trade policy. Remote sensing has been a useful tool for predicting crop yields. In this study, a modified daily process-based ecosystem model (the Boreal Ecosystem Productivity Simulator) is employed in conjunction with land cover and leaf area index (LAI) products from MODIS to predict summer grain crop yields in the northern area of the Yangtze River in the Jiangsu Province, China. The model was driven by soil texture, land cover, daily meteorological and MODIS LAI data for 2004–2006. Simulated growing season net primary productivity (NPP) of summer grain crops (November–May) and census data of crop yields in 2004 were used to derive the county-level harvest index, which is then used in conjunction with simulated NPP to predict crop yields in 2005 and 2006. The model captures 89 % and 88 % of variations in crop yields at county-level compared with census data in 2005 and 2006, respectively. The root mean square errors are 265 and 277 kg ha−1 in these two years. The results show the usefulness of a process-based model driven by remote sensing in predicting crop yields. In such predictions, the considerable spatial variability of the harvest index should be taken into consideration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".