ArticlePloS one2025
RETRACTED: The artificial intelligence-based agricultural field irrigation warning system using GA-BP neural network under smart agriculture.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2026-02-23Concerns/Issues about Article · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This work explores an intelligent field irrigation warning system based on the Enhanced Genetic Algorithm-Backpropagation Neural Network (EGA-BPNN) model in the context of smart agriculture. To achieve this, irrigation flow prediction in agricultural fields is chosen as the research topic. Firstly, the BPNN principles are studied, revealing issues such as sensitivity to initial values, susceptibility to local optima, and sample dependency. To address these problems, a genetic algorithm (GA) is adopted for optimizing the BPNN, and the EGA-BPNN model is used to predict irrigation flow in agricultural fields. Secondly, the EGA-BPNN model can overcome the local optimization and overfitting problems of traditional BPNN through the global search ability of GA. Moreover, it is suitable for the irrigation flow prediction task with complex environmental factors in smart agriculture. Finally, comparative experiments compare the prediction accuracy of BPNN and EGA-BPNN using single and dual water level flow prediction models respectively. The results reveal that as the number of nodes in the hidden layer increases, the model's Mean Squared Error (MSE) and Relative Error (RE) show a decreasing trend, indicating an improvement in model prediction accuracy. When the number of nodes in the hidden layer increases from 6 to 16, the MSE of the single and dual water level flow prediction models decreases from 4.53×10-4 to 3.68×10-4 and 2.38×10-4 to 1.66×10-4, respectively. Under a standalone BPNN, the absolute relative error in flow prediction is 1.09%. In contrast, the EGA-BPNN model achieves a significantly lower mean absolute relative error of 0.41% for single-flow prediction, demonstrating superior prediction performance. Furthermore, compared to the BPNN, the EGA-BPNN model exhibits a 2.11 reduction in MSE, further emphasizing the positive impact of introducing the GA on model performance. The research outcomes contribute to more accurate water resource planning and management, providing a more reliable basis for decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.