AI for Smart Farming: Machine Learning Models for Precision Crop Yield Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AI and other advanced technologies are gradually beginning to invade the agriculture sector to serve the increasing demand of the consumers for better methods of food production. A key component of precision agriculture, this work focuses on how to use machine learning models to predict crop yields with high accuracy. Specifically, the nature and volatility of the environmental context – such as the nature and quality of soils, as well as the climatic and water conditions – present a major challenge to the application of the conventional modeling approaches aimed at forecasting productive capacity in agriculture. Still, when comparing, the AI-driven models will allow sorting through much information gathered from different sources, including sensors, satellite imagery, and yield history. This work examines the differences of several machine learning models. Such models are the Random Forests, SVMs, and CNNs and other Deep Learning methodologies respectively. A quality model is evaluated based on scalability, computational performance, and prediction accuracy. Also in scope of the study, there is an opportunity to employ IoT together with data collected with remote sensing to make and provide realtime forecasts and evaluations. By the utilization of the results attained, it is established that the yields expected by the machine learning models are much more precise, which aids in enhancing agricultural decision-making concerning resource utilizing, crop handling, and risk minimization. The purpose of this study is focused on the promotion of the agricultural sustainability and production through the development of the innovative data driven farming practices.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".