MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188181112 · doi:10.3390/rs13163105

Evaluation of Soil Properties, Topographic Metrics, Plant Height, and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Multispectral Imagery Using Machine Learning Methods to Estimate Canopy Nitrogen Weight in Corn

2021· article· en· W3188181112 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jody Yu, Jinfei Wang, Brigitte Leblon

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCanopyEnvironmental scienceMultispectral imageRemote sensingMean squared errorNitrogenFertilizerRegression analysisVegetation (pathology)Soil scienceMathematicsAgronomyStatisticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Management of nitrogen (N) fertilizers is an important agricultural practice and field of research to minimize environmental impacts and the cost of production. To apply N fertilizer at the right rate, time, and place depends on the crop type, desired yield, and field conditions. The objective of this study is to use Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) multispectral imagery, vegetation indices (VI), crop height, field topographic metrics, and soil properties to predict canopy nitrogen weight (g/m2) of a corn field in southwestern Ontario, Canada. Random Forests (RF) and support vector regression (SVR) models were evaluated for canopy nitrogen weight prediction from 29 variables. RF consistently had better performance than SVR, and the top-performing validation model was RF using 15 selected height, spectral, and topographic variables with an R2 of 0.73 and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of 2.21 g/m2. Of the model’s 15 variables, crop height was the most important predictor, followed by 10 VIs, three MicaSense band reflectance mosaics (blue, red, and green), and topographic profile curvature. The model information can be used to improve field nitrogen prediction, leading to more effective and efficient N fertilizer management.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207