WHEAT BIOMASS ESTIMATION FROM UAV IMAGERY USING AN ENSEMBLE LEARNING APPROACH WITH BAYESIAN OPTIMIZATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Wheat is one of the most important food supply and food security globally, especially in developing countries. Therefore, predicting the performance and determining the factors that affect the production of this product is very important. Biomass is one of the crop’s most important biophysical parameters, and its correct estimation can help improve accurate monitoring of growth and crop performance forecasting. With the recent advances in remote sensing, access to aerial images taken by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) for monitoring crops has been provided. This study investigates the potential of visible UAV images and the resulting vegetation indices to estimate the dry biomass of two types of Brazilian wheat. For this purpose, the performance of three regression algorithms, including Random Forest (RF), eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB), and Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), to estimate wheat biomass was evaluated. Also, to improve the performance of regression models, Bayesian optimization (BO) was used to adjust the Hyper-parameters, and random forest feature selection was used to select the optimal subset of features. Based on the results, the XGB algorithm with the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of about 911.86 (Kg/ha) and coefficient of determination (R2) of about 0.89% showed better performance in biomass estimation than other algorithms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".