A semi-centralized multi-agent RL framework for efficient irrigation scheduling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a Semi-Centralized Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (SCMARL) approach for irrigation scheduling in spatially variable agricultural fields, where management zones address spatial variability. The SCMARL framework is hierarchical in nature, with a centralized coordinator agent at the top level and decentralized local agents at the second level. The coordinator agent makes daily binary irrigation decisions based on field-wide conditions, which are communicated to the local agents. Local agents determine appropriate irrigation amounts for specific management zones using local conditions. The framework employs state augmentation approach to handle non-stationarity in the local agents' environments. An extensive evaluation on a large-scale field in Lethbridge, Canada, compares the SCMARL approach with a learning-based multi-agent model predictive control scheduling approach, highlighting its enhanced performance, resulting in water conservation and improved Irrigation Water Use Efficiency (IWUE). Notably, the proposed approach achieved a 4.0% savings in irrigation water while enhancing the IWUE by 6.3%.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".