MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404524569 · doi:10.3390/drones8110686

Drones in Precision Agriculture: A Comprehensive Review of Applications, Technologies, and Challenges

2024· review· en· W4404524569 on OpenAlexafffund
Ridha Guebsi, Sonia Mami, Karem Chokmani

Bibliographic record

VenueDrones · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersMitacs
KeywordsDroneAgriculturePrecision agricultureComputer scienceEngineeringEngineering ethicsBiotechnologyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the face of growing challenges in modern agriculture, such as climate change, sustainable resource management, and food security, drones are emerging as essential tools for transforming precision agriculture. This systematic review, based on an in-depth analysis of recent scientific literature (2020–2024), provides a comprehensive synthesis of current drone applications in the agricultural sector, primarily focusing on studies from this period while including a few notable exceptions of particular interest. Our study examines in detail the technological advancements in drone systems, including innovative aerial platforms, cutting-edge multispectral and hyperspectral sensors, and advanced navigation and communication systems. We analyze diagnostic applications, such as crop monitoring and multispectral mapping, as well as interventional applications like precision spraying and drone-assisted seeding. The integration of artificial intelligence and IoTs in analyzing drone-collected data is highlighted, demonstrating significant improvements in early disease detection, yield estimation, and irrigation management. Specific case studies illustrate the effectiveness of drones in various crops, from viticulture to cereal cultivation. Despite these advancements, we identify several obstacles to widespread drone adoption, including regulatory, technological, and socio-economic challenges. This study particularly emphasizes the need to harmonize regulations on beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) flights and improve economic accessibility for small-scale farmers. This review also identifies key opportunities for future research, including the use of drone swarms, improved energy autonomy, and the development of more sophisticated decision-support systems integrating drone data. In conclusion, we underscore the transformative potential of drones as a key technology for more sustainable, productive, and resilient agriculture in the face of global challenges in the 21st century, while highlighting the need for an integrated approach combining technological innovation, adapted policies, and farmer training.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations213
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDronesSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207