Using Hybrid Artificial Intelligence and Evolutionary Optimization Algorithms for Estimating Soybean Yield and Fresh Biomass Using Hyperspectral Vegetation Indices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advanced high-throughput field phenotyping combined with sophisticated big data analysis methods have provided plant breeders with unprecedented tools for a better prediction of important agronomic traits, such as yield and fresh biomass (FBIO), at early growth stages. This study aimed to demonstrate the potential use of 35 selected hyperspectral vegetation indices (HVI), collected at the R5 growth stage, for predicting soybean seed yield and FBIO. Two artificial intelligence algorithms, ensemble-bagging (EB) and deep neural network (DNN), were used to predict soybean seed yield and FBIO using HVI. Considering HVI as input variables, the coefficients of determination (R2) of 0.76 and 0.77 for yield and 0.91 and 0.89 for FBIO were obtained using DNN and EB, respectively. In this study, we also used hybrid DNN-SPEA2 to estimate the optimum HVI values in soybeans with maximized yield and FBIO productions. In addition, to identify the most informative HVI in predicting yield and FBIO, the feature recursive elimination wrapper method was used and the top ranking HVI were determined to be associated with red, 670 nm and near-infrared, 800 nm, regions. Overall, this study introduced hybrid DNN-SPEA2 as a robust mathematical tool for optimizing and using informative HVI for estimating soybean seed yield and FBIO at early growth stages, which can be employed by soybean breeders for discriminating superior genotypes in large breeding populations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".