Nitrogen Estimation for Wheat Using UAV-Based and Satellite Multispectral Imagery, Topographic Metrics, Leaf Area Index, Plant Height, Soil Moisture, and Machine Learning Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To improve productivity, reduce production costs, and minimize the environmental impacts of agriculture, the advancement of nitrogen (N) fertilizer management methods is needed. The objective of this study is to compare the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) multispectral imagery and PlanetScope satellite imagery, together with plant height, leaf area index (LAI), soil moisture, and field topographic metrics to predict the canopy nitrogen weight (g/m2) of wheat fields in southwestern Ontario, Canada. Random Forests (RF) and support vector regression (SVR) models, applied to either UAV imagery or satellite imagery, were evaluated for canopy nitrogen weight prediction. The top-performing UAV imagery-based validation model used SVR with seven selected variables (plant height, LAI, four VIs, and the NIR band) with an R2 of 0.80 and an RMSE of 2.62 g/m2. The best satellite imagery-based validation model was RF, which used 17 variables including plant height, LAI, the four PlanetScope bands, and 11 VIs, resulting in an R2 of 0.92 and an RMSE of 1.75 g/m2. The model information can be used to improve field nitrogen predictions for the effective management of N fertilizer.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".