MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297504217 · doi:10.3390/s22197393

Digital Twinning of Hydroponic Grow Beds in Intelligent Aquaponic Systems

2022· article· en· W4297504217 on OpenAlexafffund
Abraham Reyes Yanes, Rabiya Abbasi, Pablo Martı́nez, Rafiq Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInnovations in Aquaponics and Hydroponics Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsAquaponicsComputer scienceAutomationThe InternetReal-time computingEmbedded systemEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of automation, Internet-of-Things (IoT), and smart technologies is being rapidly introduced into the development of agriculture. Technologies such as sensing, remote monitoring, and predictive tools have been used with the purpose of enhancing agriculture processes, aquaponics among them, and improving the quality of the products. Digital twinning enables the testing and implementing of improvements in the physical component through the implementation of computational tools in a 'twin' virtual environment. This paper presents a framework for the development of a digital twin for an aquaponic system. This framework is validated by developing a digital twin for the grow beds of an aquaponics system for real-time monitoring parameters, namely pH, electroconductivity, water temperature, relative humidity, air temperature, and light intensity, and supports the use of artificial intelligent techniques to, for example, predict the growth rate and fresh weight of the growing crops. The digital twin presented is based on IoT technology, databases, a centralized control of the system, and a virtual interface that allows users to have feedback control of the system while visualizing the state of the aquaponic system in real time.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations43
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicInnovations in Aquaponics and Hydroponics SystemsFrench-language works237,207