Application of machine learning and genetic optimization algorithms for modeling and optimizing soybean yield using its component traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Improving genetic yield potential in major food grade crops such as soybean (Glycine max L.) is the most sustainable way to address the growing global food demand and its security concerns. Yield is a complex trait and reliant on various related variables called yield components. In this study, the five most important yield component traits in soybean were measured using a panel of 250 genotypes grown in four environments. These traits were the number of nodes per plant (NP), number of non-reproductive nodes per plant (NRNP), number of reproductive nodes per plant (RNP), number of pods per plant (PP), and the ratio of number of pods to number of nodes per plant (P/N). These data were used for predicting the total soybean seed yield using the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), Radial Basis Function (RBF), and Random Forest (RF), machine learning (ML) algorithms, individually and collectively through an ensemble method based on bagging strategy (E-B). The RBF algorithm with highest Coefficient of Determination (R2) value of 0.81 and the lowest Mean Absolute Errors (MAE) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values of 148.61 kg.ha-1, and 185.31 kg.ha-1, respectively, was the most accurate algorithm and, therefore, selected as the metaClassifier for the E-B algorithm. Using the E-B algorithm, we were able to increase the prediction accuracy by improving the values of R2, MAE, and RMSE by 0.1, 0.24 kg.ha-1, and 0.96 kg.ha-1, respectively. Furthermore, for the first time in this study, we allied the E-B with the genetic algorithm (GA) to model the optimum values of yield components in an ideotype genotype in which the yield is maximized. The results revealed a better understanding of the relationships between soybean yield and its components, which can be used for selecting parental lines and designing promising crosses for developing cultivars with improved genetic yield potential.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".