MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3075397214 · doi:10.3390/rs12162659

Recent Advances of Hyperspectral Imaging Technology and Applications in Agriculture

2020· article· en· W3075397214 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingMultispectral imagePrecision agricultureRemote sensingComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceAgricultureArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remote sensing is a useful tool for monitoring spatio-temporal variations of crop morphological and physiological status and supporting practices in precision farming. In comparison with multispectral imaging, hyperspectral imaging is a more advanced technique that is capable of acquiring a detailed spectral response of target features. Due to limited accessibility outside of the scientific community, hyperspectral images have not been widely used in precision agriculture. In recent years, different mini-sized and low-cost airborne hyperspectral sensors (e.g., Headwall Micro-Hyperspec, Cubert UHD 185-Firefly) have been developed, and advanced spaceborne hyperspectral sensors have also been or will be launched (e.g., PRISMA, DESIS, EnMAP, HyspIRI). Hyperspectral imaging is becoming more widely available to agricultural applications. Meanwhile, the acquisition, processing, and analysis of hyperspectral imagery still remain a challenging research topic (e.g., large data volume, high data dimensionality, and complex information analysis). It is hence beneficial to conduct a thorough and in-depth review of the hyperspectral imaging technology (e.g., different platforms and sensors), methods available for processing and analyzing hyperspectral information, and recent advances of hyperspectral imaging in agricultural applications. Publications over the past 30 years in hyperspectral imaging technology and applications in agriculture were thus reviewed. The imaging platforms and sensors, together with analytic methods used in the literature, were discussed. Performances of hyperspectral imaging for different applications (e.g., crop biophysical and biochemical properties’ mapping, soil characteristics, and crop classification) were also evaluated. This review is intended to assist agricultural researchers and practitioners to better understand the strengths and limitations of hyperspectral imaging to agricultural applications and promote the adoption of this valuable technology. Recommendations for future hyperspectral imaging research for precision agriculture are also presented.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.205 · 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