1. Enhanced Rubber Yield Prediction in High-Density Plantation Areas Using a GIS and Machine Learning-Based Forest Classification and Regression Model.
- Author
-
Littidej, Patiwat, Kromkratoke, Winyoo, Pumhirunroj, Benjamabhorn, Buasri, Nutchanat, Prasertsri, Narueset, Sangpradid, Satith, and Slack, Donald
- Subjects
STANDARD deviations ,PRICE regulation ,RUBBER ,RANDOM forest algorithms ,GEOGRAPHIC information systems - Abstract
Rubber is a perennial plant grown for natural rubber production, which is used in various global products. Ensuring the sustainability of rubber cultivation is crucial for smallholder farmers and economic development. Accurately predicting rubber yields is necessary to maintain price stability. Remote sensing technology is a valuable tool for collecting spatial data on a large scale. However, for smaller plots of land owned by smallholder farmers, it is necessary to process productivity estimates from high-resolution satellite data that are accurate and reliable. This study examines the impact of spatial factors on rubber yield and evaluates the technical suitability of using grouping analysis with the forest classification and regression (FCR) method. We developed a high-density variable using spatial data from rubber plots in close proximity to each other. Our approach incorporates eight environmental variables (proximity to streamlines, proximity to main river, soil drainage, slope, aspect, NDWI, NDVI, and precipitation) using an FCR model and GIS. We obtained a dataset of 1951 rubber yield locations, which we split into a training set (60%) for model development and a validation set (40%) for assessment using area under the curve (AUC) analysis. The results of the alternative FCR models indicate that Model 1 performs the best. It achieved the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) value of 19.15 kg/ha, the highest R-squared (R
2 ) value (FCR) of 0.787, and also the highest R2 (OLS) value of 0.642. The AUC scores for Model 1, Model 2, and Model 3 were 0.792, 0.764, and 0.732, respectively. Overall, Model 4 exhibited the highest performance according to the AUC scores, while Model 3 performed the poorest with the lowest AUC score. Based on these findings, it can be concluded that Model 1 is the most effective in predicting FCR compared to the other alternative models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF