Multi-model ensembles for regional and national wheat yield forecasts in Argentina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract While multi-model ensembles (MMEs) of seasonal climate models (SCMs) have been used for crop yield forecasting, there has not been a systematic attempt to select the most skillful SCMs to optimize the performance of a MME and improve in-season yield forecasts. Here, we propose a statistical model to forecast regional and national wheat yield variability from 1993–2016 over the main wheat production area in Argentina. Monthly mean temperature and precipitation from the four months (August–November) before harvest were used as features. The model was validated for end-of-season estimation in December using reanalysis data (ERA) from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) as well as for in-season forecasts from June to November using a MME of three SCMs from 10 SCMs analyzed. A benchmark model for end-of-season yield estimation using ERA data achieved a R 2 of 0.33, a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 9.8% and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) score of 0.8 on national level. On regional level, the model demonstrated the best estimation accuracy in the northern sub-humid Pampas with a R 2 of 0.5, a RMSE of 12.6% and a ROC score of 0.9. Across all months of initialization, SCMs from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction, the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory had the highest mean absolute error of forecasted features compared to ERA data. The most skillful in-season wheat yield forecasts were possible with a 3-member-MME, combining data from the SCMs of the ECMWF, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the French national meteorological service. This MME forecasted wheat yield on national level at the beginning of November, one month before harvest, with a R 2 of 0.32, a RMSE of 9.9% and a ROC score of 0.7. This approach can be applied to other crops and regions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".