MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Satellite Imagery and AI-Based Detection of Common Waterhemp (AMATU) Infestation in Soybean Fields

2025· article· W7154598148 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nourhene Aloui, Sandra Flores‐Mejia, Lokman Sboui

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDate Palm Research Studies
Canadian institutionsGrain Research Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et CultureMitacs
KeywordsSatellite imageryInfestationSatelliteField (mathematics)Reflectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in Earth Observation (EO) and artificial intelligence (AI) have enabled scalable solutions for sustainable crop management. In Quebec soybean fields, weeds such as common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus, AMATU) are spreading rapidly, showing strong resistance to herbicides and threatening crop productivity. To address this challenge, we propose an operational pipeline that combines very highresolution (0.5 m) multispectral Pleiades imagery, ground-verified infestation data, and supervised machine learning. Spectral indices are extracted from four bands, with Random Forest emerging as the most robust model (Accuracy: 0.818, F1-score: 0.821) compared to Gradient Boosting, XGBoost, KNN, SVM, and Linear Regression. SHAP analysis shows that near-infrared (NIR) based measurements are the most important for the model's decisions. The final output is a probability heatmap that highlights true infestation zones with minimal false negatives and limited false positives, mainly in bare soil or dense soybean areas. Results demonstrate that this approach provides a cost-effective, scalable tool for early detection and targeted management of AMATU. These results contribute to reducing herbicide inputs, production costs, and also promote more sustainable agricultural practices.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDate Palm Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207