MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117750055 · doi:10.3390/agriculture16010093

Optimization of Sensor Combinations for Simplified Estimation of Reference Crop Evapotranspiration Using Machine Learning and SHAP Interpretation

2025· article· en· W7117750055 on OpenAlexaff
Qiong Zhang, Yang Xu, Cheng Ding, Weining Xiu, Chang Liu, Shufen Dai

Bibliographic record

VenueAgriculture · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityEvapotranspirationRandom forestEstimationLinear regressionRegressionInterpretation (philosophy)Regression analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurately estimating reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0) is essential for agricultural water-resource management, yet the traditional Penman–Monteith (PM) method requires multiple meteorological variables and is difficult to apply in data-sparse regions. To explore more data-efficient alternatives, this study systematically evaluates several machine-learning (ML) models capable of capturing nonlinear relationships, using daily observations from 698 meteorological stations across China. In addition, we incorporate SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP), a game-theory-based interpretability approach, to quantify the contribution of input variables at both national and regional scales. The results show that the Random Forest (RF) model performs best (coefficient of determination, R2 = 0.957; mean absolute percentage error, MAPE = 9.214%), significantly outperforming multiple linear regression and approaching the accuracy of the PM method. SHAP analysis indicates that maximum temperature, sunshine duration, and month are the most influential factors nationwide. Geographic variables contribute less overall but become important in specific regions, such as Southwest China. The study also reveals pronounced spatial heterogeneity in the drivers of ET0, highlighting the necessity of regionalized interpretations. Furthermore, sensor-reduction experiments demonstrate that reasonable estimation accuracy can be maintained even without radiation or wind-speed observations, offering guidance for low-cost monitoring scenarios. Overall, this study provides transparent model comparisons for ML-based ET0 estimation, uncovers regional differences in controlling factors, and offers practical insights for designing meteorological monitoring strategies in data-limited environments.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultureSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207