MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313589049 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2399044/v1

Simultaneous multi-crop land suitability prediction from remote sensing data using semi-supervised learning

2023· preprint· en· W4313589049 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amanjot Bhullar, Khurram Nadeem, Randa Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Land Suitability Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCompute Canada
KeywordsArtificial neural networkAgricultureAgricultural engineeringCanolaMachine learningEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceCropTraining setTraining (meteorology)Growing seasonArtificial intelligenceMeteorologyGeographyAgronomyEngineeringForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study presents an artificial neural network based model that can simultaneously estimate land suitability for barley, peas, spring wheat, canola, oats, and soy in Canada leading to more accurate predictions than single-crop models. The novelties in the modelling method include using an indicator function which allows for a multivariate model to be trained, and a semi-supervised learning approach which allows for training with unlabelled data. The model performs well on land not used in the training set, as demonstrated by both K-fold cross-validation and a visual comparison of crop inventory to predicted land suitability in northern Alberta. The predicted suitability of crops correspond with a region's growing season length; this is in line with literature. Northern Canada is almost completely unused for agriculture, but this may change in the coming decades due to the climate becoming more favorable for agriculture. The model presented in this work can allow for a precise cost benefit analysis regarding environmental damage and economic benefits of cultivating new lands in Canada.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicSoil and Land Suitability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207