Applying a particle filtering technique for canola crop growth stage estimation in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate crop growth stage estimation is important in precision agriculture as it facilitates improved crop management, pest and disease mitigation and resource planning. Earth observation imagery, specifically Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data, can provide field level growth estimates while covering regional scales. In this paper, RADARSAT-2 quad polarization and TerraSAR-X dual polarization SAR data and ground truth growth stage data are used to model the influence of canola growth stages on SAR imagery extracted parameters. The details of the growth stage modeling work are provided, including a) the development of a new crop growth stage indicator that is continuous and suitable as the state variable in the dynamic estimation procedure; b) a selection procedure for SAR polarimetric parameters that is sensitive to both linear and nonlinear dependency between variables; and c) procedures for compensation of SAR polarimetric parameters for different beam modes. The data was collected over three crop growth seasons in Manitoba, Canada, and the growth model provides the foundation of a novel dynamic filtering framework for real-time estimation of canola growth stages using the multi-sensor and multi-mode SAR data. A description of the dynamic filtering framework that uses particle filter as the estimator is also provided in this paper.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".