MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925877842 · doi:10.20381/ruor-29865

Yield Prediction Using Spatial and Temporal Deep Learning Algorithms and Data Fusion

2023· article· en· W6925877842 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecision agricultureCrop yieldField (mathematics)Production (economics)Food securityAgricultureStaple foodAgricultural productivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world’s population is expected to grow to 9.6 billion by 2050. This exponential growth imposes a significant challenge on food security making the development of efficient crop production a growing concern. The traditional methods of analyzing soil and crop yield rely on manual field surveys and the use of expensive instruments. This process is not only time-consuming but also requires a team of specialists making this method of prediction expensive. Prediction of yield is an integral part of smart farming as it enables farmers to make timely informed decisions and maximize productivity while minimizing waste. Traditional statistical approaches fall short in optimizing yield prediction due to the multitude of diverse variables that influence crop production. Additionally, the interactions between these variables are non-linear which these methods fail to capture. Recent approaches in machine learning and data-driven models are better suited for handling the complexity and variability of crop yield prediction. Maize, also known as corn, is a staple crop in many countries and is used in a variety of food products, including bread, cereal, and animal feed. In 2021-2022, the total production of corn was around 1.2 billion tonnes superseding that of wheat or rice, making it an essential element of food production. With the advent of remote sensing, Unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs are widely used to capture high-quality field images making it possible to capture minute details for better analysis of the crops. By combining spatial features, such as topography and soil type, with crop growth information, it is possible to develop a robust and accurate system for predicting crop yield. Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are a type of deep neural network that has shown remarkable success in computer vision tasks, achieving state-of-the-art performance. Their ability to automatically extract features and patterns from data sets makes them highly effective in analyzing complex and high-dimensional datasets, such as drone imagery. In this research, we aim to build an effective crop yield predictor using data fusion and deep learning. We propose several Deep CNN architectures that can accurately predict corn yield before the end of the harvesting season which can aid farmers by providing them with valuable information about potential harvest outcomes, enabling them to make informed decisions regarding resource allocation. UAVs equipped with RGB (Red Green Blue) and multi-spectral cameras were scheduled to capture high-resolution images for the entire growth period of 2021 of 3 fields located in Ottawa, Ontario, where primarily corn was grown. Whereas, the ground yield data was acquired at the time of harvesting using a yield monitoring device mounted on the harvester. Several data processing techniques were employed to remove erroneous measurements and the processed data was fed to different CNN architectures, and several analyses were done on the models to highlight the best techniques/methods that lead to the most optimal performance. The final best-performing model was a 3-dimensional CNN model that can predict yield utilizing the images from the Early(June) and Mid(July) growing stages with a Mean Absolute Percentage error of 15.18% and a Root Mean Squared Error of 17.63 (Bushels Per Acre). The model trained on data from Field 1 demonstrated an average Correlation Coefficient of 0.57 between the True and Predicted yield values from Field 2 and Field 3. This research provides a direction for developing an end-to-end yield prediction model. Additionally, by leveraging the results from the experiments presented in this research, image acquisition, and computation costs can be brought down.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207