MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161977649 · doi:10.82308/41408

Optimization of geospatial data modelling for crop production by integrating proximal soil sensing and remote sensing data

2020· dissertation· en· W7161977649 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Md Saifuzzaman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital soil mappingSoil mapGeospatial analysisPrecision agricultureThematic mapCluster analysisSampling (signal processing)Field (mathematics)Pixel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging technologies in precision agriculture (PA) offer a wide array of advanced methods to assess soil properties and to determine soil variability. Remote sensing (RS) and proximal soil sensing (PSS) technologies, widely used in quantifying surface and subsurface soil parameters, can be combined to infer spatial patterns of soil heterogeneity and to develop thematic maps for site-specific management. However, the use of these soil sensors must be reviewed constantly to maintain their efficiency and precision in delineating the soil-crop relationship and to inform PA approaches. Data mining and model optimization are key to evaluating high-density geospatial data in a dynamic production system. High-density PSS and RS-based soil characterization was explored and optimization techniques for digital soil mapping in PA were evaluated.In a first study, sensor measurements were subjected to multivariate statistical analysis, followed by an evaluation of a new Neighborhood Search Analyst (NSA) and the capacity of other data clustering algorithms to delineate spatially contiguous zones in agricultural fields and to optimize soil sampling locations to inform best management practices. PSS-based topography, apparent electrical conductivity (ECa), and RS-based indices data from 3 sites in Ontario, Canada, were employed to assess the novel technique’s performance in accurate zone delineation. In creating homogeneous zones, a maximum of 70% field variance (R2 = 0.70) was achieved. The R2 of the k-means cluster compared to that of the NSA was relatively higher (R2 = 0.80) where, the k-means cluster map consisted of groups or pixels with isolated boundaries in various parts of the field. The NSA’s unique capacity, across various locations, to produce an optimum (or user-defined) number of zones highlighted its superiority to k-means’ partitioning with isolated boundaries.A second study assessed the utility of PSS-based soil characterization in developing an optimum prediction method for multiple soil properties at 12 sites across Ontario, Canada. Measured ECa, topographic parameters and six lab-quantified soil properties [pH, buffer pH, soil organic matter (SOM), Phosphorus (P), Potassium (K) and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC)] were used in evaluating the method’s predictive capacity and to compare different fields’ propagated soil measurement errors by drawing on the results of the North American Proficiency Testing program. Pearson’s correlation coefficients exceeding 0.60 indicated strong relationships between sensor variables and field-measured soil properties, topographic parameters and shallow ECa sensor variables, allowing effective predictions of several soil chemical properties (i.e., SOM, P, and CEC).Lastly, supervised machine learning models drawing on high-density information from multiple sensors (PSS and RS) operating at different geospatial scales, were used to generate thematic soil maps for an agricultural field in Ontario, Canada. A random forest (RF) regression model delineated the complex hierarchical relationships existing among the sensor variables and evaluated prediction efficiencies for multiple soil nutrients. The reduction of variables based on their relative importance and parameter optimization (i.e., by defining the number of trees) of the regression forest improved the predictive accuracy for nine soil properties at the cross-validation stage. The best prediction capacity has been achieved for soil pH, K, and Zn (R2 ≥ 0.80)

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)0.003
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207