MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6921784113 · doi:10.1051/agro:2004058/pdf

Regionalization of outputs of two crop protection models using geostatistical tools and NOAA-AVHRR images

2005· article· en· W6921784113 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionExclosureDysgeusiaHyporeflexiaLiquationArticular cartilage damage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crop protection forecasting models currently use meteorological data observed at stations to produce pest infection and development indices. The indices are then extrapolated to the regional level by assuming that the weather conditions at the stations are similar to those in neighbouring fields in the region, which is not necessarily the case. Hence, this has a significant impact on the quality of the recommendations and diagnoses based on computerized plant protection models. The regionalization of model outputs between the stations comprising the weather network, using geostatistical techniques such as cokriging in conjunction with satellite data, is a worthwhile approach for addressing this need. The objective of this study is to develop and apply a methodology for regionalization of infection indices produced by two crop protection models contained in the CIPRA (Computer Centre for Agricultural Pest Forecasting) system, using geostatistical tools and NOAA-AVHRR images. This approach will help enhance our crop pest management and forecasting capabilities while optimizing the use of pest control products in vegetable crops in Quebec. To achieve our objective, a cokriging method was applied to regionalize the model outputs using air temperature and relative humidity estimated from NOAA-AVHRR images. The results were then validated against a regionalization approach using ordinary kriging and two conventional interpolation techniques.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)→Same topicRemote Sensing in Agriculture→French-language works237,207→