Recent Trends and Advances in Utilizing Digital Image Processing for Crop Nitrogen Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crop nitrogen (N) management in agricultural fields is crucial in preventing various environmental and socio-economic issues arising from excess N use. However, precise crop N management (PNM) is hindered by its intensive data requirements, high cost, and time requirements. Digital image processing (DIP) offers a promising approach to overcoming these challenges, and numerous studies have explored its application in N management. This review aims to analyze research trends in applying DIP for N management over the past 5 years, summarize the most recent studies, and identify challenges and opportunities. Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and Engineering Village were referred to for literature searches. A total of 95 articles remained after the screening and selection process. Interest in integrating machine learning and deep learning algorithms with DIP has increased, with the frequently used algorithms—Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, Extreme Gradient Boost, and Convolutional Neural Networks—achieving higher prediction accuracy levels. In addition, image data using more variables as model inputs, including agriculture sensors and meteorological data, have increased prediction accuracy. Nonetheless, several challenges associated with DIP, including obtaining high-quality datasets, complex image processing steps, costly infrastructure, and a user-unfriendly technical environment, still need to be addressed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".