The digitization of agricultural industry – a systematic literature review on agriculture 4.0
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agriculture is considered one of the most important sectors that play a strategic role in ensuring food security. However, with the increasing world's population, agri-food demands are growing — posing the need to switch from traditional agricultural methods to smart agriculture practices, also known as agriculture 4.0. To fully benefit from the potential of agriculture 4.0, it is significant to understand and address the problems and challenges associated with it. This study, therefore, aims to contribute to the development of agriculture 4.0 by investigating the emerging trends of digital technologies in the agricultural industry. For this purpose, a systematic literature review based on Protocol of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses is conducted to analyse the scientific literature related to crop farming published in the last decade. After applying the protocol, 148 papers were selected and the extent of digital technologies adoption in agriculture was examined in the context of service type, technology readiness level, and farm type. The results have shown that digital technologies such as autonomous robotic systems, internet of things, and machine learning are significantly explored and open-air farms are frequently considered in research studies (69%), contrary to indoor farms (31%). Moreover, it is observed that most use cases are still in the prototypical phase. Finally, potential roadblocks to the digitization of the agriculture sector were identified and classified at technical and socio-economic levels. This comprehensive review results in providing useful information on the current status of digital technologies in agriculture along with prospective future opportunities.
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 | 0.015 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.024 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".