Crop yield estimation in the Canadian Prairies : assessing the relative importance of scale, satellite and biophysical data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crop production plays an important role in the Canadian Prairie economy. Crop yield models based on satellite data offer promise for obtaining consistent yield estimates across large regions. With the growing availability of observational yield data, mostly at coarser spatial scales, linear regression models have been a popular modeling tool in Canadian agriculture. Using historical crop yields from two spatial scales for key crops in the Canadian Prairies, this dissertation evaluates how to improve satellite-based yield estimation models by incorporating biophysical data and using new modeling algorithms. First, I developed linear regression models for the Canadian Prairies (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba) using satellite data for historical yield estimation using municipality scale data for model training. Vegetation indices derived from different satellite datasets (Terra-MODIS, Landsat 7&8, Sentinel-2) were tested. I found that a single vegetation index model could perform as well as a model trained using multiple different vegetation indices as long as the right vegetation index was identified for the purpose. This highlights the critical need to identify the target application and corresponding sensor-specific vegetation index/indices. Second, using the same municipality scale data, I investigated how the addition of weather data to a vegetation index-based model influences estimation accuracy. I also compared the performance of multiple linear regression to machine learning. I found that combining weather data with vegetation indices within a machine learning approach improved estimation accuracy by 3-5% across crops compared to linear regression using satellite data alone. Third, I developed a crop yield prediction model calibrated using sub-field-scale yields from one farm in the Canadian Prairies. I assessed the performance of machine and deep learning models and different combinations of satellite and biophysical data. I found that Random Forests using optimal inputs improved prediction accuracy by 7-8% across crops compared to linear regression using only vegetation indices. An application of the optimal model in within-season forecasting mode showed that end-of-season yield forecasts stabilized within three months of lead time for canola and wheat. The findings of this dissertation demonstrate the potential of additional biophysical inputs and non-linear machine learning models for improving crop yield estimation and forecasting.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".