MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213293762 · doi:10.3390/rs14040951

Quantifying Hail Damage in Crops Using Sentinel-2 Imagery

2022· article· en· W4213293762 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thuan Ha, Yanben Shen, Hema Duddu, Eric N. Johnson, Steven J. Shirtliffe

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexVegetation (pathology)Index (typography)Mean squared errorVegetation IndexClimate changeStatisticsGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hailstorms are a frequent natural weather disaster in the Canadian Prairies that can cause catastrophic damage to field crops. Assessment of damage for insurance claims requires insurance inspectors to visit individual fields and estimate damage on individual plants. This study computes temporal profiles and estimates the severity of hail damage to crops in 54 fields through the temporal analysis of vegetation indices calculated from Sentinel-2 images. The damage estimation accuracy of eight vegetative indices in different temporal analyses of delta index (pre-and post-hail differences) or area under curve (AUC) index (time profiles of index affected by hail) was compared. Hail damage was accurately quantified by using the AUC of 32 days of Normalized Difference Vegetation Indices (NDVI), Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI), and Plant Senescence Radiation Index (PSRI). These metrics were well correlated with ground estimates of hail damage in canola (r = −0.90, RMSE = 8.24), wheat (r = −0.86, RMSE = 12.27), and lentil (r = 0.80, RMSE = 17.41). Thus, the time-series changes in vegetation indices had a good correlation with ground estimates of hail damage which may allow for more accurate assessment of the extent and severity of hail damage to crop land.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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