Site-specific machine learning predictive fertilization models for potato crops in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1 Abstract Statistical modeling is commonly used to relate the performance of potato ( Solanum tuberosum L.) to fertilizer requirements. Prescribing optimal nutrient doses is challenging because of the involvement of many variables including weather, soils, land management, genotypes, and severity of pests and diseases. Where sufficient data are available, machine learning algorithms can be used to predict crop performance. The objective of this study was to predict tuber yield and quality (size and specific gravity) as impacted by nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium fertilization as well as weather, soils and land management variables. We exploited a data set of 273 field experiments conducted from 1979 to 2017 in Quebec (Canada). We developed, evaluated and compared predictions from a hierarchical Mitscherlich model, k -nearest neighbors, random forest, neuronal networks and Gaussian processes. Machine learning models returned R 2 values of 0.49–0.59 for tuber marketable yield prediction, which were higher than the Mitscherlich model R 2 (0.37). The models were more likely to predict medium-size tubers (R 2 = 0.60–0.69) and tuber specific gravity (R 2 = 0.58–0.67) than large-size tubers (R 2 = 0.55–0.64) and marketable yield. Response surfaces from the Mitscherlich model, neural networks and Gaussian processes returned smooth responses that agreed more with actual evidence than discontinuous curves derived from k -nearest neighbors and random forest models. When marginalized to obtain optimal dosages from dose-response surfaces given constant weather, soil and land management conditions, some disagreements occurred between models. Due to their built-in ability to develop recommendations within a probabilistic risk-assessment framework, Gaussian processes stood out as the most promising algorithm to support decisions that minimize economic or agronomic risks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".