MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W264620245 · doi:10.3920/9789086865147_104

Application of multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) in precision agriculture

2003· book-chapter· en· W264620245 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K.M. Turpin, David R. Lapen, E. G. Gregorich, G. C. Topp, Neil B. McLaughlin, W. E. Curnoe, Michel Robin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Supply Chain Traceability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate adaptive regression splinesMars Exploration ProgramMultivariate statisticsRegressionAgricultureComputer scienceStatisticsEconometricsMathematicsGeographyNonparametric regressionAstrobiologyBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water quality is a major concern. Some agricultural practices can contribute to the degradation of water quality, particularly when fertilizers are not used efficiently. In order to properly manage nitrogen in corn production systems, the factors that govern yield must be identified. The multivariate adaptive regression spline (MARS) automated regression data mining method was used to determine the environmental factors that governed corn yield for cash and livestock cropping systems on clay loam soils in eastern Ontario, Canada during low yielding conditions in 2000. Statistically important variables included post-harvest soil water content, cone penetration resistance, and to a lesser degree, elevation and total mineral soil N (NH4+ + NO3-) in spring prior to planting. The MARS approach was deemed an acceptable, although time consuming approach for: identifying interactions between potentially yield governing variables/indicators, elucidating potential cause-effect processes, and identifying areas where soil physical constraints were potentially more important than soil nitrogen in governing yield.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFood Supply Chain TraceabilityFrench-language works237,207