Modeling Hyperspectral Response of Water-Stress Induced Lettuce Plants Using Artificial Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modeling the hyperspectral response of vegetables is important for estimating water stress through a noninvasive approach. This article evaluates the hyperspectral response of water-stress induced lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) using artificial neural networks (ANN). We evenly split 36 lettuce pots into three groups: control, stress, and bacteria. Hyperspectral response was measured four times, during 14 days of stress induction, with an ASD Fieldspec HandHeld spectroradiometer (325–1075 nm). Both reflectance and absorbance measurements were calculated. Different biophysical parameters were also evaluated. The performance of the ANN approach was compared against other machine learning algorithms. Our results show that the ANN approach could separate the water-stressed lettuce from the non-stressed group with up to 80% accuracy at the beginning of the experiment. Additionally, this accuracy improved at the end of the experiment, reaching an accuracy of up to 93%. Absorbance data offered better accuracy than reflectance data to model it. This study demonstrated that it is possible to detect early stages of water stress in lettuce plants with high accuracy based on an ANN approach applied to hyperspectral data. The methodology has the potential to be applied to other species and cultivars in agricultural fields.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".