2019
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-16148-4_27
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spatial-Temporal Multi-Task Learning for Within-Field Cotton Yield Prediction

Abstract: Understanding and accurately predicting within-field spatial variability of crop yield play a key role in site-specific management of crop inputs such as irrigation water and fertilizer for optimized crop production. However, such a task is challenged by the complex interaction between crop growth and environmental and managerial factors, such as climate, soil conditions, tillage, and irrigation. In this paper, we present a novel Spatial-temporal Multi-Task Learning algorithms for within-field crop yield predi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
10
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
(25 reference statements)
2
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the current study, the use of publicly available datasets to predict lint yield across two field sites provided poorer predictions at squaring (RMSE = 0.21-26 t ha −1 , LCCC = 0.25-0.32) compared with later in the season at flowering (RMSE = 0.17 t ha −1 , LCCC = 0.50-0.66) and boll-fill (RMSE = 0.15-0.20 t ha −1 , LCCC = 0.55-0.62). These findings are in agreement with other studies where the addition of more data improved yield predictions as the season progressed (Filippi, Jones, et al, 2019;Filippi et al, 2020;Huang et al, 2013;Nguyen et al, 2019;Thomasson et al, 2004). The improved predictions in the current study later in the season were primarily attributed to stronger relationships between GNDVI and yield.…”
Section: Model Performancesupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In the current study, the use of publicly available datasets to predict lint yield across two field sites provided poorer predictions at squaring (RMSE = 0.21-26 t ha −1 , LCCC = 0.25-0.32) compared with later in the season at flowering (RMSE = 0.17 t ha −1 , LCCC = 0.50-0.66) and boll-fill (RMSE = 0.15-0.20 t ha −1 , LCCC = 0.55-0.62). These findings are in agreement with other studies where the addition of more data improved yield predictions as the season progressed (Filippi, Jones, et al, 2019;Filippi et al, 2020;Huang et al, 2013;Nguyen et al, 2019;Thomasson et al, 2004). The improved predictions in the current study later in the season were primarily attributed to stronger relationships between GNDVI and yield.…”
Section: Model Performancesupporting
confidence: 92%
“…To capture the real-time dynamics of input, Addict Free utilizes a LSTM model for relapse time series prediction due to its wellhandling ability of long and short term time dependency. The model is also utilized in other types of prediction as in [4] and [1][2][3]. Figure 5 shows the basic structure of LSTM.…”
Section: Methods 41 Relapse Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More broadly speaking, the issues of merging multi-site data have been actively investigated in recent literature on medical image analysis. For instance, Nguyen et al [25] proposed a novel multi-site learning algorithm to learn different features and aggregate spatial-temporal features through a weighted regularizer based on an integrated multiple heterogeneous dataset. The deep multi-task learning (MTL) framework [26] could effectively improve the accuracy of skin lesion classification through the additional context information provided by body location.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%