Claim · model-written summary
EVI-based models produced more accurate phenological fits than WDRVI across parcels.
Zea maysNot reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“EVI-based models were more reliable than WDRVI, generating more accurate phenomenological fits and yield predictions across parcels”
t0“Maize Yield”
Title
Dorijan Radočaj; Ivan Plaščak; Mladen Jurišić Eng—Advances in Engineering 2025. doi:10.3390/eng6100270
Other claims from this paper (5)
- Method / resource Spatial cross-validation gave a more realistic and conservative estimate of maize yield model performance.
- Method / resource Regular cross-validation systematically overestimated predictive accuracy because samples were spatially dependent.
- Method / resource EVI-based models were more reliable than WDRVI models.
- Method / resource EVI-based models produced more accurate yield predictions than WDRVI across parcels.
- Recommendation The authors recommend spatially explicit validation for subfield yield modeling.