Ensemble Learning for Oat Yield Prediction Using Multi-Growth Stage UAV Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate crop yield prediction is crucial for optimizing cultivation practices and informing breeding decisions. Integrating UAV-acquired multispectral datasets with advanced machine learning methodologies has markedly refined the accuracy of crop yield forecasting. This study aimed to construct a robust and versatile yield prediction model for multi-genotyped oat varieties by investigating 14 modeling scenarios that combine multispectral data from four key growth stages. An ensemble learning framework, StackReg, was constructed by stacking four base algorithms—ridge regression (RR), support vector machines (SVM), Cubist, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost)—to predict oat yield. The results show that, for single growth stages, base models achieved R2 values within the interval of 0.02 to 0.60 and RMSEs ranging from 391.50 to 620.49 kg/ha. By comparison, the StackReg improved performance, with R2 values extending from 0.25 to 0.61 and RMSEs narrowing to 385.33 and 542.02 kg/ha. In dual-stage and multi-stage settings, the StackReg consistently surpassed the base models, reaching R2 values of up to 0.65 and RMSE values as low as 371.77 kg/ha. These findings underscored the potential of combining UAV-derived multispectral imagery with ensemble learning for high-throughput phenotyping and yield forecasting, advancing precision agriculture in oat cultivation.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".