ArticleScientific reports2026
Optimization of water-saving irrigation decision using dynamic spatiotemporal graph neural networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Water-saving irrigation is critical for improving water use efficiency and ensuring sustainable food production. However, accurate prediction of farmland water demand remains difficult because soil, crop, and meteorological processes interact across space, depth, and time. To address this problem, we develop an AI-STGNN-based irrigation decision framework in which AI-STGNN serves as the core predictive model. The main methodological contribution is a dynamic three-dimensional (3D) graph that represents vertical soil heterogeneity and time-varying hydrological connectivity, while channel-wise meteorological attention and multi-scale temporal memory are incorporated as agro-hydrology-specific enhancements. On the held-out 2021-2022 test set, AI-STGNN achieved RMSE, MAE, and R² values of 3.63 vol%, 2.88 vol%, and 0.89, respectively, reducing RMSE by 7.2% relative to STGCN and by 16.7% relative to LSTM. Under heavy rainfall, its RMSE increased by 45%, compared with 59-70% for the baseline models. In the two-season field comparison across three representative farms, the AI-STGNN-guided strategy reduced irrigation water use by 12.3-15.7%, increased crop yield by 3.5-4.2%, and improved water use efficiency by 13.7-17.8% relative to conventional empirical irrigation. Because the field comparison covers only two growing seasons and three sites, these practical gains should be interpreted as preliminary rather than definitive. Overall, the proposed framework provides a physically informed, data-driven basis for dynamic water-demand prediction and irrigation scheduling in the studied Midwest cropping system.
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.