MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389104597 · doi:10.1109/tim.2023.3336448

Measuring Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density in the Blue and Red Spectrum for Horticultural Lighting Using Machine Learning Methods

2023· article· en· W4389104597 on OpenAlexafffund
Afagh Mohagheghi, Mehrdad Moallem

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsDaylightSpectroradiometerCalibrationDaylightingLight intensityPhoton countingOpticsRemote sensingEnvironmental sciencePhotonComputer sciencePhysicsMathematicsStatisticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents development of a low-cost sensor to measure the light intensity for plant growth, referred to as photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD), which is a quantum light measurement unit for horticultural LED lighting. The total PPFD is comprised of daylight and supplemental LED lights in the red and blue photosynthesis wavebands with peak wavelengths at 660 and 457 nm, respectively. To this end, a multiwaveband spectral light sensor is utilized along with an accurate spectroradiometer reference sensor for calibration. A comparative study of machine learning-based methods is presented to obtain the sensor coefficients for measuring the PPFD, indicating that the decision tree and random forest models exhibit low mean absolute percentage errors (MAPEs) of 0.01%–0.88% for red and blue channels, respectively; but may lead to data over-fitting in real-time applications because of their complexity. However, the simple multilinear regression method yields MAPEs of 0.98% and 0.84% for red and blue channels, respectively, which may be better suited for real-time applications. As a use-case scenario, the calibrated PPFD sensor was experimentally tested on a hydroponic testbed located inside a greenhouse facility. The system was exposed to natural and supplemental light emitting diode (LED) lighting, in the blue and red light spectra, under a daylighting feedback control scheme. Experiments demonstrate that daily light integral (DLI) values with less than 20% tracking errors can be achieved on the blue and red channels using the calibrated sensors.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207