Simulating the development and growth of lentil using the CSM‐CROPGRO model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The pulse crop lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) is often grown in crop rotations to provide nitrogen (N) and water benefits for subsequent crops. Lentil yields vary greatly with environmental factors and management. A reliable crop model for lentil could assist efforts to assess the effects of management practices to mitigate environmental stresses and maximize lentil yields. However, few crop models simulate the development and growth of lentil. In this study, we adapted the CSM‐CROPGRO model in the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer to simulate lentil development and growth based on data collected from six experiments conducted from 2001 to 2021 globally. The initial parameter values taken from faba bean (Vicia faba L.) were modified based on reported information and analysis of observed data. Those values were fine‐tuned to minimize the gaps between the simulated and observed crop attributes. The model simulated well development stages with root mean square error (RMSE) of 4 days and aboveground biomass with normalized root mean square error (nRMSE ≤ 23%). Seed yields were generally well simulated across experiments in calibration and validation (nRMSE = 19%) datasets, except for overestimation under the humid environment of Quebec in Canada, which may have resulted from excessive vegetative growth. The underlying mechanisms leading to excessive vegetative growth need to be explored further and included in the model for evaluating the adaptability of lentils to specific regions. Overall, the CSM‐CROPGRO‐Lentil model is ready for simulating lentil production under various scenarios, which may identify ways to improve the productivity and resiliency of cropping systems that include lentil.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".