MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010189188 · doi:10.3390/s20051449

A Cost-Effective and Portable Optical Sensor System to Estimate Leaf Nitrogen and Water Contents in Crops

2020· article· en· W3010189188 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Habibullah, Mohammad Reza Mohebian, Raju Soolanayakanahally, Khan A. Wahid, Anh Dinh

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLeaf Properties and Growth Measurement
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanolaMultispectral imageGreenhouseEnvironmental scienceAgronomyReflectivityCorrelation coefficientPartial least squares regressionRemote sensingMathematicsStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-invasive determination of leaf nitrogen (N) and water contents is essential for ensuring the healthy growth of the plants. However, most of the existing methods to measure them are expensive. In this paper, a low-cost, portable multispectral sensor system is proposed to determine N and water contents in the leaves, non-invasively. Four different species of plants-canola, corn, soybean, and wheat-are used as test plants to investigate the utility of the proposed device. The sensor system comprises two multispectral sensors, visible (VIS) and near-infrared (NIR), detecting reflectance at 12 wavelengths (six from each sensor). Two separate experiments were performed in a controlled greenhouse environment, including N and water experiments. Spectral data were collected from 307 leaves (121 for N and 186 for water experiment), and the rational quadratic Gaussian process regression (GPR) algorithm was applied to correlate the reflectance data with actual N and water content. By performing five-fold cross-validation, the N estimation showed a coefficient of determination () of 63.91% for canola, 80.05% for corn, 82.29% for soybean, and 63.21% for wheat. For water content estimation, canola showed an of 18.02%, corn showed an of 68.41%, soybean showed an of 46.38%, and wheat showed an of 64.58%. The result reveals that the proposed low-cost sensor with an appropriate regression model can be used to determine N content. However, further investigation is needed to improve the water estimation results using the proposed device.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicLeaf Properties and Growth MeasurementFrench-language works237,207