Utilization of unmanned aerial vehicles for zonal winemaking in cool-climate Riesling vineyards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individual vineyards can vary spatially for several viticultural attributes, including water stress, nutrient status, growth/vigour and disease—which can, in turn, impact berry composition and resulting wine products. The goal of this study was to determine if vineyard variability detected by remote sensing using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) could be used to zonally harvest vineyard blocks and produce wines that are sensorially differentiable. The specific hypothesis was that remote sensing would detect vineyard variation in viticultural variables and associate this variation with differences in wine sensory attributes based upon zonal harvesting. In six commercial Riesling vineyards across the Niagara Peninsula in Ontario, Canada, a UAV collected multispectral data, which were used to calculate the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). Grapevines (≈ 80) in a grid pattern were geo-located within each block and vineyard UAV NDVI maps were used for zonal harvesting of geo-located vines in areas corresponding to high vs. low NDVI. Wines made from these zones were then compared chemically and sensorially. Overall, wines created from high vs. low NDVI zones differed inconsistently in their basic wine composition. Sensorially, for certain sites and vintages, panellists distinguished between wines made from high vs. low NDVI zones using a sorting task. UAV NDVI demonstrated the ability to determine areas within a vineyard block that could produce wines that were sensorially distinguishable from one another.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".