Optimisation of Anaerobic Digestate and Chemical Fertiliser Application to Enhance Rice Yield—A Machine-Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study evaluates the synergistic application of an anaerobic digestate for enhanced rice yield. The study utilised the digestate as a fertiliser with various inoculum-to-substrate (IS) ratios of anaerobic digestion from cow dung and water hyacinth (CW–BF) with combinations of NPK (16-22-22) fertiliser for rice yield optimisation. The outcome of the combined digestate and fertiliser application on rice cultivation was observed in terms of parameters such as the number of tillers, panicle number, panicle length, fertile panicles, and 1000-grain weight. The digestate combination of CW–BF:NPK (3:1:1) resulted in the highest grain yield (7521 kg/hectare) with increased panicle length, test weight, and more filled grains than the other combinations. Moreover, various machine-learning approaches were used to study the efficacy of the different combinations of applied fertiliser (cow dung, water hyacinth, and NPK). The gradient-boosting machine-learning model was appropriate for predicting the modelling based on the measured data. Principal component analysis revealed NPK as the first principal component with high loading values and the digestate as the second principal component, which indicates its crucial role in fertiliser preparation. Therefore, deploying such hybridised fertilisers using the proper statistical analysis and machine-learning approaches can improve rice yield, which would be essential for the socio-economic uplifting of marginal rice farmers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".