A Systematic Literature Review on Parameters Optimization for Smart Hydroponic Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydroponics is a soilless farming technique that has emerged as a sustainable alternative. However, new technologies such as Industry 4.0, the internet of things (IoT), and artificial intelligence are needed to keep up with issues related to economics, automation, and social challenges in hydroponics farming. One significant issue is optimizing growth parameters to identify the best conditions for growing fruits and vegetables. These parameters include pH, total dissolved solids (TDS), electrical conductivity (EC), light intensity, daily light integral (DLI), and nutrient solution/ambient temperature and humidity. To address these challenges, a systematic literature review was conducted aiming to answer research questions regarding the optimal growth parameters for leafy green vegetables and herbs and spices grown in hydroponic systems. The review selected a total of 131 papers related to indoor farming, hydroponics, and aquaponics. The review selected a total of 123 papers related to indoor farming, hydroponics, and aquaponics. The majority of the articles focused on technology description (38.5%), artificial illumination (26.2%), and nutrient solution composition/parameters (13.8%). Additionally, remaining 10.7% articles focused on the application of sensors, slope, environment and economy. This comprehensive review provides valuable information on optimized growth parameters for smart hydroponic systems and explores future prospects and the application of digital technologies in this field.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it