2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2020.105667
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Yield prediction and validation of onion (Allium cepa L.) using key variables in narrowband hyperspectral imagery and effective accumulated temperature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The models were developed by sequentially applying latent variables from 1 to 15 in PLS and an alpha of 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, and 1 in RR and GP, and then the parameters of the model with the lowest MSE were selected. The possibility of reducing computational costs and improving reproducibility was considered by comparing the performances of models using the full bands and selected key bands [29]. The key bands were selected by comparing the R 2 of the calibration (prediction) and validation models depending on the combination of bands listed through the rank of importance of each band using the variance importance in the projection method for the PLS-based model and the Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) method for the RR-and GP-based models.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The models were developed by sequentially applying latent variables from 1 to 15 in PLS and an alpha of 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, and 1 in RR and GP, and then the parameters of the model with the lowest MSE were selected. The possibility of reducing computational costs and improving reproducibility was considered by comparing the performances of models using the full bands and selected key bands [29]. The key bands were selected by comparing the R 2 of the calibration (prediction) and validation models depending on the combination of bands listed through the rank of importance of each band using the variance importance in the projection method for the PLS-based model and the Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) method for the RR-and GP-based models.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The variance importance in the projection value is calculated as the importance of each predictor, reflecting the weighted sum of squares of the PLSR weights [29]. The VIP can synthetize the contributions of the predictor and response variables, and the variables with a VIP value greater than 0.8 or 1 are considered significant [34].…”
Section: Variance Importance In Projectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Variable importance in projection (VIP) is one of the most frequently used methods for variable selection in chemometrics, and the VIP scores selection method has been extensively used in various agricultural fields [24,30]. It summarizes the influence of individual x variables on the partial least squares (PLS) model and provides a measure that is useful for selecting x variables that contribute most to the y variance explanation [31].…”
Section: Variable Importance In Projectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This implies that model calibrations are needed for each cultivation region and year [55]. Some studies have suggested that applying climate data such as temperature, precipitation, and solar radiation as well as important spectral variables such as PI 1 and PI 2 is important to increase predictability on crop yield in other years [28,56]. As a result, when the cumulative temperature data for each year were applied in the mutual prediction of the onion yield model, the RMSEP was lower, with a difference of about 16%.…”
Section: Comparison With and Extension Of Related Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the various regression methods for the prediction of rice parameters, it is important to select a regression method that can be developed as a year-invariant model. The potential of developing a yearinvariant model must be verified through cross-validation for different years via the collection of multiyear data [28]. However, although the model is based on multiyear data, changes in the environmental conditions at various fields may make it difficult to reproduce the model [18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%