MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392757984 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-14337

Quantifying spatial variability of crop water use by combining eddy covariance observations with high-resolution UAV-based remote sensing

2024· preprint· en· W4392757984 on OpenAlexaffabout
Warren Helgason, Anders Hunter, Phillip Harder, Emily Cline

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy covarianceRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceCovarianceCropImage resolutionHigh resolutionSpatial variabilityComputer scienceGeographyMathematicsStatisticsEcosystemArtificial intelligenceForestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Applications of precision agriculture enable water management decisions to be made at increasingly fine resolutions—smaller than which we can routinely estimate the water use from crops.  Direct measurement of crop evapotranspiration (ET) using the eddy covariance technique can provide continuous flux observations but cannot provide insight at smaller scales than the measurement footprint (~100-200m). On the other hand, remote sensing techniques based on the energy balance approach are capable of quantifying spatial patterns of ET at high resolutions but are limited to particular instances in time and cannot provide the temporal information required. In this research, we develop and evaluate a method to spatially disaggregate continuous ET measurements from eddy covariance systems. The approach is based on developing high resolution spatial maps of ET derived from a combination of UAV-thermal remote sensing energy balance modeling that is parameterized using UAV-LiDAR to measure crop canopy characteristics (leaf area index, canopy height, and vegetation fraction). Through consideration of the eddy covariance flux footprint, and the remotely-sensed spatial detail, temporally continuous spatial estimates of ET were developed. The application of this method is demonstrated for barley grown in the Canadian prairies under strongly heterogeneous field conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.269
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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207