Using Artificial Neural Networks and Remotely Sensed Data to Evaluate the Relative Importance of Variables for Prediction of Within-Field Corn and Soybean Yields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crop yield prediction prior to harvest is important for crop income and insurance projections, and for evaluating food security. Yet, modeling crop yield is challenging because of the complexity of the relationships between crop growth and predictor variables, especially at the field scale. In this study, an artificial neural network (ANN) method was used: (1) to evaluate the relative importance of predictor variables for the prediction of within-field corn and soybean end-of-season yield and (2) to evaluate the performance of the ANN models with a minimal optimized variable dataset for their capacity to predict corn and soybean yield over multiple years at the within-field level. Several satellite derived vegetation indices (normalized difference vegetation index—NDVI, red edge NDVI and simple ratio—SR) and elevation derived variables (slope, flow accumulation, aspect) were used as crop yield predictor variables, hypothesizing that the different variables reflect different crop and site conditions. The study identified the SR index and the slope as the most important predictor variables for both crop types during two training and testing years (2011, 2012). The dates of the most important SR images, however, were different for the two crop types and corresponded to their critical crop developmental stages (phenology). The relative mean absolute errors were overall smaller for corn compared to soybean: all of the 2011 corn study fields had errors below 10%; 75% of the fields had errors below 10% in 2012. The errors were more variable for soybean. In 2011, 37% of the fields had errors below 10%, while in 2012, 100% of the fields had errors below 20%. The results are promising and can provide yield estimates at the farm level, which could be useful in refining broader scale (e.g., county, region) yield projections.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 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".