MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2962683497 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n13p156

Biophysical Parameters and Actual Evapotranspiration of Bean Culture by Means of Remote Sensing

2019· article· en· W2962683497 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Allisson Lucas Brandão Lima, Roberto Filgueiras, Everardo Chartuni Mantovani, Daniel Althoff, Robson Argolo dos Santos, Luan Peroni Venâncio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsEvapotranspirationSAFERCrop coefficientCorrelation coefficientIrrigationEnvironmental scienceRelation (database)Normalized Difference Vegetation IndexAgricultural engineeringMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsLeaf area indexData miningAgronomyEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agricultural irrigation is involved in an important chain that involves all sectors of the economy, either directly, by increasing food production, or indirectly, by withdrawing large amounts of fresh water. The relevance of this theme forces the search for alternatives to make water use as rational as possible. Evapotranspiration estimation methods based in remote sensing, such as the SAFER (Simple Algorithm for Evapotranspiration Retrieving) model, become extremely relevant in these scenarios, since it is possible to estimate this parameter in large scales. Therefore, the aim of this research was to apply the SAFER model in the estimation of bean crop actual evapotranspiration using Landsat-8 satellite image data. One of the parameters used as input in the SAFER model is the NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index), which presented a coefficient of determination (r²) equal to 0.80 when compared to the crop coefficient. The actual evapotranspiration (ETa) estimated by the SAFER model were compared to the FAO 56 model estimates for later correlation between the models. This information is expected to assist the producer in a better management of water resources used in irrigation. The correlation between the two models presented a relevant coefficient of determination (r2 = 0.73), representing the potential of the SAFER model in relation to the FAO model 56.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics→French-language works237,207→