Crossref DOIMemberCiteFactoropen accessissn
SJIF Impact Factor 8.659 | ISSN: 2582-3930
IJSREM Logo

International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management

(Gateway to Global Scholars - An International, Scholarly, Multi-Disciplinary, Open Access Journal)

Peer-Reviewed Journal Designed to Meet UGC's Quality Parameters

HomeCurrent IssuePast IssuesPay OnlineConferencesEditorial BoardAbout UsContact Us
IJSREM

Loading article...

Follow Us

  • Google Scholar
  • ResearchGate
  • Academia.edu
  • Mendeley
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram

Journal Policies

  • Peer Review Policy
  • Publication Ethics
  • Copyright Infringement
  • Refund & Cancellation Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy

Journal Identifiers & Licenses

  • ISSN Verified: 2582-3930ISSN Verified: 2582-3930
  • Crossref DOI: 10.55041Crossref DOI: 10.55041
  • SJIF Ranking: 08.659SJIF Ranking: 08.659
  • Licensed under CC BY 4.0Licensed under CC BY 4.0
  • ISO Certification: 9001:2015ISO Certification: 9001:2015
  • Indexed & Cited In: Google ScholarIndexed & Cited In: Google Scholar

Contact Us

International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management (IJSREM)

#62/1, New No 7, 1st Cross, 2nd Main, Ganganagar, R T Nagar, Bangalore North, Bangalore, Karnataka, India – 560032
[email protected]+91 93911 67991
logos
logos
Working Hours

Mon – Sat: 9:00 AM – 6:00 PM

Sunday: 10:00 AM – 4:00 PM

+91 93911 67991

© 2026 IJSREM – International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management. This is an open-access journal. Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
ArticlePeer ReviewedOpen AccessPlagiarism Passed
Paper ID:IJSREM67040

Machine Learning for Crop Yield Prediction Using Sensor Data

Stream/Area:

-

Subject:

-

Paper ID:

IJSREM67040

Volume:

10 |

8 |

Aug 2026

Pages:

1-15

Publication Frequency:

Monthly (12 issues per year)

DOI
Digital Object Identifier
Not assigned

License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.

Share this article:

Authors

HN

Hariharan. N

Department of Computer Science and Engineering

Kings College of Engineering, Punalkulam

Download Author Certificate
BP

Balamurugan. P

Department of Computer Science and Engineering

Kings College of Engineering, Punalkulam

Download Co-Author Certificate

Author Services & Downloads

Full ArticlesAcceptance Certificate

Abstract

Crop yield prediction is central to agricultural planning, food security, and farm-level decision-making, yet conventional approaches still rely heavily on manual field estimation and the subjective experience of farmers or agronomists. Such methods struggle to incorporate real-time environmental variability, are slow to update, and cannot easily reconcile the many interacting factors that govern plant growth, including soil moisture, temperature, humidity, rainfall, and nutrient availability. The proliferation of low-cost Internet of Things (IoT) sensors has made it possible to continuously capture fine-grained soil and atmospheric parameters directly from the field, creating an opportunity to replace episodic manual assessment with data-driven, near-real-time prediction. This paper proposes a machine-learning-based framework for crop yield prediction that ingests multi-parameter sensor data — including soil moisture, soil and air temperature, relative humidity, rainfall, soil pH, electrical conductivity, and NPK nutrient levels — and transforms it into yield estimates through a structured pipeline of data acquisition, cleaning, feature engineering, and model training. Six representative learning algorithms are examined and compared conceptually: Linear Regression, Decision Tree Regression, Random Forest Regression, Support Vector Regression, Gradient Boosting/XGBoost, and Artificial Neural Networks, each evaluated for its suitability to the nonlinear, noisy, and heterogeneous nature of agricultural sensor data. Standard regression metrics — Mean Absolute Error, Mean Squared Error, Root Mean Squared Error, and the coefficient of determination (R²) — are described as the basis for model comparison. As no field deployment or labelled dataset was collected for this study, the work is presented as a proposed framework and illustrative experimental design rather than a report of empirical results, and all performance figures shown are clearly marked as illustrative placeholders for the evaluation structure that a full implementation would populate. The discussion highlights the practical significance of the framework for farmers and agricultural planners, including support for irrigation scheduling, fertilizer optimization, and early identification of yield decline, while also outlining the limitations of sensor-based prediction systems, such as calibration drift, missing data, and regional variability, and the future directions needed to move from prototype to field-ready deployment.

KEYWORDS

Machine Learning Crop Yield Prediction Agricultural IoT Sensor Data Precision Agriculture Smart Farming Regression Crop Monitoring

Cite This Article

Hariharan. N, Balamurugan. P, "Machine Learning for Crop Yield Prediction Using Sensor Data," International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 1-15, Aug 2026.

Full Article/Conclusion

This paper has proposed a machine-learning-based framework for crop yield prediction driven by multi-parameter agricultural sensor data, addressing the limitations of manual, experience-based yield estimation through continuous, automated environmental monitoring combined with data-driven modelling. The framework specifies a complete pipeline from sensor deployment through preprocessing, feature engineering, model training, and evaluation, and conceptually compares six regression algorithms — Linear Regression, Decision Tree, Random Forest, Support Vector Regression, Gradient Boosting/XGBoost, and Artificial Neural Networks — for their suitability to this problem. Because no field dataset was collected for this study, the work is presented explicitly as a proposed framework and experimental design rather than a report of measured results, and all illustrative figures and tables are labelled accordingly. If implemented with genuine sensor data, the framework is expected to support practical benefits for farmers and agricultural planners, including more timely irrigation and fertilization decisions and earlier identification of yield risk. Realizing this potential in practice will require addressing the limitations discussed in Section X, particularly sensor reliability, cost, and regional generalization, and pursuing the future directions outlined in Section XI, from edge AI to satellite-data fusion, to move the framework from a conceptual proposal toward a field-validated decision-support tool.

References

[1] T. van Klompenburg, A. Kassahun, and C. Catal, "Crop yield prediction using machine learning: A systematic literature review," Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, vol. 177, p. 105709, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2020.105709. [2] A. Chlingaryan, S. Sukkarieh, and B. Whelan, "Machine learning approaches for crop yield prediction and nitrogen status estimation in precision agriculture: A review," Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, vol. 151, pp. 61–69, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2018.05.012. [3] M. Rashid, B. S. Bari, Y. Yusup, M. A. Kamaruddin, and N. Khan, "A comprehensive review of crop yield prediction using machine learning approaches with special emphasis on palm oil yield prediction," IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 63406–63439, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3075159. [4] N. Bali and A. Singla, "Emerging trends in machine learning to predict crop yield and study its influential factors: A survey," Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 95–112, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11831-021-09569-8. [5] L. Breiman, "Random forests," Machine Learning, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 5–32, 2001, doi: 10.1023/A:1010933404324. [6] J. H. Jeong, J. P. Resop, N. D. Mueller, D. H. Fleisher, K. Yun, E. E. Butler, D. J. Timlin, K.-M. Shim, J. S. Gerber, V. R. Reddy, and S.-H. Kim, "Random forests for global and regional crop yield predictions," PLoS ONE, vol. 11, no. 6, e0156571, 2016, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156571. [7] "A comparative study of machine learning models in predicting crop yield," Discover Agriculture, vol. 3, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s44279-025-00335-z. [8] P. Nevavuori, N. Narra, and T. Lipping, "Crop yield prediction with deep convolutional neural networks," Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, vol. 163, p. 104859, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2019.104859. [9] P. Nevavuori, N. Narra, and T. Lipping, "Crop yield prediction using multitemporal UAV data and spatio-temporal deep learning models," Remote Sensing, vol. 12, no. 23, p. 4000, 2020, doi: 10.3390/rs12234000. [10] J. Shook, T. Gangopadhyay, L. Wu, B. Ganapathysubramanian, S. Sarkar, and A. K. Singh, "Crop yield prediction integrating genotype and weather variables using deep learning," PLoS ONE, vol. 16, no. 6, e0252402, 2021, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252402.

Editorial & Review Transparency

Publication Date

8/31/2026

Peer Review Type

Double-Blind Peer Review

Review Rounds: 2

Documents

Review Report (Confidential)
Copyright Form (Office)

Article Metrics & Impact

Article Views

2

Total views since publication

PDF Downloads

2

Total downloads since publication

Geographic Reach

5

Indexing, Archiving & Preservation

Google Scholar
Academia
ResearchGate
Crossref
SSRN
Semantic Scholar
Thomson Reuters
WorldCat
Mendeley
OpenAlex
EBSCO
Zenodo

Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.

Ethics, Compliance & Transparency

Plagiarism Screening

This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.

Funding Information

No funding information available for this research.

Similar & Recommended Articles

Similar Articles by Topic

Related research in the same subject area

Loading similar articles...