MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405550267 · doi:10.1007/s43621-024-00736-y

Future of sustainable farming: exploring opportunities and overcoming barriers in drone-IoT integration

2024· article· en· W4405550267 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscover Sustainability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneInternet of ThingsAgricultureSustainable agricultureBusinessEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceKnowledge managementGeographyComputer securityEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable agriculture is being transformed by drone-IoT integration, improving precision, efficiency, and sustainability. This study examines the pros and downsides of using various technologies to handle connectivity, data management, and power consumption issues. We assess existing integration methods, such as multispectral imaging, real-time IoT monitoring, and machine learning-driven predictive analytics, to gain actionable insights into soil health, crop conditions, and pest control. We also explore regulatory frameworks and technical constraints, including data security and affordability that prevent widespread use. Research shows that drone IoT solutions improve agricultural output, resource consumption, and farm efficiency, but cost and infrastructure hurdles limit availability, especially for smallholder farmers. These findings show that supporting regulatory frameworks and economical technology solutions are needed to increase adoption. Advances in agricultural autonomous decision-making could increase food security and sustainable farming worldwide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.211 · 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