MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412434556 · doi:10.1016/j.jag.2025.104729

Alfalfa stem count estimation using remote sensing imagery and machine learning on Google Earth Engine

2025· article· en· W4412434556 on OpenAlexafffund
Hazhir Bahrami, Karem Chokmani, Saeid Homayouni, Viacheslav I. Adamchuk, Md Saifuzzaman, Rami Albasha, Maxime Leduc

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsShared Services CanadaMcGill UniversityInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMitacsFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsEarth (classical element)Remote sensingGeographyEstimationEarth observationCartographyComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsSystems engineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L. ), a perennial legume forage crop, is valued for its high yield and quality. However, its survival during winter can be affected by several factors, and its mortality significantly impacts alfalfa production, necessitating timely and spatially detailed monitoring. This study aims to propose a framework for estimating alfalfa stem density using satellite imagery and machine learning (ML) algorithms, which can lead to winter mortality detection early in the spring and provide a better understanding of potential total dry matter. Three ML models—support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGB)—were applied to Harmonized Landsat Sentinel (Landsat only, which is HLSL30) and Sentinel-2 datasets, accessed via the Google Earth Engine (GEE) Python API. Two scenarios were evaluated: 1) single-date data, capturing satellite images within a 3-day time window to the date of field sample measurement, and 2) time-series data, in which three satellite images were collected for the measurements during the first growing cycle. Both classification and regression models were used in both scenarios to estimate and classify alfalfa stem density. ML Classification models categorized stem density into four groups (bare, low-density, medium-density, and high-density), achieving an accuracy of up to 85 % using Sentinel-2 data and 84 % using HLSL30 data. The results also indicated that alfalfa stem density can be estimated with an error of ∼ ±6-9 stems/foot 2 (1 foot = 30.48 cm) using ML regression models. RF outperformed XGB and SVM in classification and regression tasks, showing superior accuracy in classifying density and lower root mean square error (RMSE) in estimating stem density. Our proposed framework model can offer valuable information to growers and decision-makers, enabling them to make timely and informed decisions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Applied Earth Observation and GeoinformationSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207