Machine Learning-Assisted Approaches in Modernized Plant Breeding Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the face of a growing global population, plant breeding is being used as a sustainable tool for increasing food security. A wide range of high-throughput omics technologies have been developed and used in plant breeding to accelerate crop improvement and develop new varieties with higher yield performance and greater resilience to climate changes, pests, and diseases. With the use of these new advanced technologies, large amounts of data have been generated on the genetic architecture of plants, which can be exploited for manipulating the key characteristics of plants that are important for crop improvement. Therefore, plant breeders have relied on high-performance computing, bioinformatics tools, and artificial intelligence (AI), such as machine-learning (ML) methods, to efficiently analyze this vast amount of complex data. The use of bigdata coupled with ML in plant breeding has the potential to revolutionize the field and increase food security. In this review, some of the challenges of this method along with some of the opportunities it can create will be discussed. In particular, we provide information about the basis of bigdata, AI, ML, and their related sub-groups. In addition, the bases and functions of some learning algorithms that are commonly used in plant breeding, three common data integration strategies for the better integration of different breeding datasets using appropriate learning algorithms, and future prospects for the application of novel algorithms in plant breeding will be discussed. The use of ML algorithms in plant breeding will equip breeders with efficient and effective tools to accelerate the development of new plant varieties and improve the efficiency of the breeding process, which are important for tackling some of the challenges facing agriculture in the era of climate change.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".