Machine learning classification of plant genotypes grown under different light conditions through the integration of multi-scale time-series data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to mitigate the effects of a changing climate, agriculture requires more effective evaluation, selection, and production of crop cultivars in order to accelerate genotype-to-phenotype connections and the selection of beneficial traits. Critically, plant growth and development are highly dependent on sunlight, with light energy providing plants with the energy required to photosynthesize as well as a means to directly intersect with the environment in order to develop. In plant analyses, machine learning and deep learning techniques have a proven ability to learn plant growth patterns, including detection of disease, plant stress, and growth using a variety of image data. To date, however, studies have not assessed machine learning and deep learning algorithms for their ability to differentiate a large cohort of genotypes grown under several growth conditions using time-series data automatically acquired across multiple scales (daily and developmentally). Here, we extensively evaluate a wide range of machine learning and deep learning algorithms for their ability to differentiate 17 well-characterized photoreceptor deficient genotypes differing in their light detection capabilities grown under several different light conditions. Using algorithm performance measurements of precision, recall, F1-Score, and accuracy, we find that Suport Vector Machine (SVM) maintains the greatest classification accuracy, while a combined ConvLSTM2D deep learning model produces the best genotype classification results across the different growth conditions. Our successful integration of time-series growth data across multiple scales, genotypes and growth conditions sets a new foundational baseline from which more complex plant science traits can be assessed for genotype-to-phenotype connections.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".