ArticleFrontiers in plant science2026
Hyperspectral estimation of leaf chlorophyll under small-sample conditions via spectral augmentation and weighted ensemble learning.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Under small-sample conditions, hyperspectral leaf chlorophyll estimation is affected by high-dimensional collinearity, measurement noise, and cross-source acquisition discrepancies. Existing studies often treat training-distribution expansion and model-error complementarity separately. This study proposed a physically constrained composite spectral augmentation-weighted ensemble framework for reproducible small-sample chlorophyll estimation. Methods: Using 1,113 valid spectrum-label pairs from the leaf subset of the GreenHySpectra dataset in the 400-1000 nm range, spectra and chlorophyll reference values were matched by sample identifiers and divided into training and validation sets. Low-magnitude Gaussian noise and smooth wavelength warping were applied only to the training set. XGBoost, partial least squares regression, and ridge regression were optimized with Optuna using a CMA-ES sampler, and ensemble weights were calibrated by Bayesian optimization. An independent external set of 90 tomato leaf samples was used to evaluate transferability. Results: Composite augmentation improved model stability and reduced validation error relative to the non-augmented baseline. The weighted ensemble model achieved the best internal performance, with R² = 0.6392 and RMSE = 8.8883. On the external samples, the model achieved R² = 0.498 and RMSE = 9.801. Discussion: The proposed workflow integrates physically plausible augmentation, heterogeneous learner complementarity, and independent external validation. The external results indicate partial cross-source transferability while highlighting distributional and measurement-chain discrepancies that still limit absolute generalization.
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.