MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289878074 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.07.466

LSTM-based model predictive control with discrete actuators for irrigation scheduling

2022· article· en· W4289878074 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIrrigation Practices and Water Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrrigation schedulingComputer scienceModel predictive controlActuatorScheduling (production processes)IrrigationHomogeneousMathematical optimizationLow-flow irrigation systemsAgricultural engineeringWater conservationControl (management)EngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of well-devised irrigation scheduling methods is desirable from the perspectives of plant quality and water conservation. In this article, a model predictive control (MPC) with discrete actuators is developed for irrigation scheduling, where a long short-term memory (LSTM) model of the soil-water-atmosphere system is used to evaluate the objective of ensuring optimal water uptake in crops while minimizing total water consumption and irrigation costs. A heuristic method involving a sigmoid function is used in this framework to enhance the computational efficiency of the scheduler. The scheduling scheme is applied to a homogeneous field and the results indicate that the LSTM-based MPC with discrete actuators is able to prescribe optimal or near-optimal irrigation schedules that are typical of irrigation practice.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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