Machine learning approach for satellite-based subfield canola yield prediction using floral phenology metrics and soil parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Early monitoring of within-field yield variability and forecasting yield potential is critical for farmers and other key stakeholders such as policymakers. Remote sensing techniques are progressively being used in yield prediction studies due to easy access and affordability. Despite the increasing use of remote sensing techniques for yield prediction in agriculture, there is still a need for medium-resolution satellite imagery when predicting canola yield using a combination of crop and soil information. In this study, we investigated the utility of remotely sensed flowering information from PlanetScope (at 4 m) satellite imagery combined with derived soil and topography parameters to predict canola yield. Our yield prediction model was trained and validated using data from 21 fields managed under variable rate seed and fertilizer application, including cleaned harvester yield maps, soil, and topography maps. To quantify the flowering intensity of canola, 9 vegetation indices (VIs) were calculated using spectral bands from PlanetScope imagery acquired for the reproductive stages of canola. We created five random forest regression models using different subsets of covariates, including VIs, soil, and topography features, to predict canola yield within the season. Using a random forest regression algorithm, we recorded accuracies ranging from poor to best performing using coefficient of determination and root mean squared error (R2: 0.47 to 0.66, RMSE: 325 to 399 kg ha−1). The optimal subset of covariates identified electrical conductivity (EC), Normalized Difference Yellowness Index, and Canola Index as the key variables explaining within-spatial variability in canola yield. Our final model exhibited a validation R2 of 0.46 (RMSE = 730 kg ha−1), demonstrating the potential of medium-resolution satellite imagery during the flowering stage to detect and quantify sub-field spatial and temporal floral phenology changes when predicting canola yield.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".