A Review on Sensing Technologies for High-Throughput Plant Phenotyping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current epidemic, population growth, and decreasing arable lands lead to a severe food crisis, which calls for productive and efficient agricultural methods to ensure a sustainable food supply for mankind. Crop monitoring is considered to be a potential solution for the improvement of food production. Current crop monitoring combines agriculture methodologies with other advanced technologies, including sensing technology, geographical information systems (GIS), Internet of Things (IoT), information and communication technology (ICT), robotics, and drone techniques to increase production with low labor cost. The high-throughput plant phenotyping is crucial for crop monitoring on the data acquisition of large-scale crop characteristics. The high-throughput plant phenotyping studies aim to achieve fast and precise large-scale crop monitoring techniques with minimum environmental impact by applying special plant phenotyping platforms. The phenotyping platforms are integrated with various sensors and data communication systems, which can help to achieve automatic data acquisition and transmission. This paper reviews the current high-throughput plant phenotyping development in crop monitoring, including sensors, communication protocols, data management, and plant phenotyping platforms. State-of-art challenges are reviewed and discussed. Also, the paper provides discussions on the current situation, upcoming challenges, and possible future trends for researchers in this field.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".