MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7122410529 · doi:10.23977/acss.2025.090412

Improvement of Particle Swarm Algorithm for Multi-objective Planting Scheme Optimization and Empirical Analysis

2025· article· W7122410529 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yanzhuo Wu, Guangwu Ao

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Computer Signals and Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIrrigation Practices and Water Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationConvergence (economics)Pareto principleSowingScheme (mathematics)Swarm behaviourMulti-swarm optimizationResource (disambiguation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To address the issues of low resource utilization efficiency and poor multi-objective coordination in traditional planting scheme optimization, by integrating the particle swarm algorithm with machine learning technology, an improved particle swarm algorithm that incorporates adaptive inertia weight, chaotic disturbance mechanism, and Pareto elite retention strategy is proposed. A multi-objective planting scheme optimization model is constructed. Taking a typical agricultural area as the empirical object, multi-dimensional data such as soil, climate, and market are collected. The decision variables such as crop types, planting area, and irrigation strategy are optimized through the improved algorithm. The experimental results show that the convergence speed of the improved algorithm is 32.6% and 21.8% higher than that of the standard PSO and MOPSO algorithms respectively. The optimal planting scheme generated can increase the total crop yield of the region by 15.3%, improve the water resource utilization rate by 28.5%, and increase the economic benefits by 19.7%. This research verifies the effectiveness and superiority of the improved particle swarm algorithm in multi-objective planting optimization, providing a scientific basis and technical support for agricultural modernization planting 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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Computer Signals and SystemsSame topicIrrigation Practices and Water ManagementFrench-language works237,207