2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2009.12.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling of the effect of dry periods on yielding of spring barley

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The coefficient of residual mass (CRM) is the measurement of relations between the forecast and the measured values. When the value of CRM is 0, it indicates the ideal fit, its positive or negative values indicate, respectively, over or underestimation (Szulczewski et al 2010). When the level of trust a ¼ 0:05 it was verified that there is no reason why the hypothesis of fit of errors of model with the normal distribution should be rejected.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The coefficient of residual mass (CRM) is the measurement of relations between the forecast and the measured values. When the value of CRM is 0, it indicates the ideal fit, its positive or negative values indicate, respectively, over or underestimation (Szulczewski et al 2010). When the level of trust a ¼ 0:05 it was verified that there is no reason why the hypothesis of fit of errors of model with the normal distribution should be rejected.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The close contingence of traits allows to evaluate indirectly the parameters of one according to the indicators of the other. However, the contingence of traits of plant productivity varies significantly depending on the soil and climatic conditions of cultivation [22].…”
Section: Research Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Then the relative root mean square error (RRMSE) 36 was the next measure method, which checked the relation between the data calculated from the model, the empirical values (RRMSE and CRM test). The closer the result is to 0, the better the fit of the model to the observed values:…”
Section: Verification Of the Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%