This paper reviewed the weed problems in agriculture and how remote sensing techniques can detect weeds in rice fields. The comparison of weed detection between traditional practices and automated detection using remote sensing platforms is discussed. The ideal stage for controlling weeds in rice fields was highlighted, and the types of weeds usually found in paddy fields were listed. This paper will discuss weed detection using remote sensing techniques, and algorithms commonly used to differentiate them from crops are deliberated. However, weed detection in rice fields using remote sensing platforms is still in its early stages; weed detection in other crops is also discussed. Results show that machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) remote sensing techniques have successfully produced a high accuracy map for detecting weeds in crops using RS platforms. Therefore, this technology positively impacts weed management in many aspects, especially in terms of the economic perspective. The implementation of this technology into agricultural development could be extended further.

Due to environmental threats and weather uncertainty concerns, oil palm yield prediction is crucial for sustaining crop production. This can be achieved through machine learning and utilising remotely sensed data to predict crop yield. However, the comparative studies on remotely sensed data in adopting the machine learning models are still limited due to the data accessibility. Therefore, we compare and evaluate the prediction accuracy between different satellites, namely MODIS and Landsat-7, using machine learning algorithms and the topology of deep neural networks. Random forest and stacking outperformed linear regression, ridge regression, and lasso regression for both Landsat-7 NDVI (R2= 0.78–0.80; RMSE=1.00- 1.26 tonnes per hectare; MAE=0.77- 0.79 tonnes per hectares; MAPE=0.03-0.04 tonnes per hectare) and MODIS NDVI (R2= 0.60–0.65 tonnes per hectares; RMSE= 2.72–2.81 tonne per hectares; MAE= 1.42-1.55, MAPE= 1.01- 1.02 tonnes per hectares). The Landsat-7 NDVI revealed that neural networks with a deeper network topology (R2= 0.85; RMSE= 1.42 tonnes per hectare; MAE=0.57 tonnes per hectares; MAPE=0.06 tonnes per hectare) outperformed neural networks with a baseline and broader network topologies in terms of performance. In contrast, MODIS-NDVI revealed that the neural network with a wider network topology had the highest overall prediction accuracy and the lowest prediction error (R2= 0.75; RMSE= 2.81 tonnes per hectare; MAE=2.27 tonnes per tonnes; MAPE= 0.13). Because of its higher spatial resolution in comparison to MODIS, landsat-7 NDVI used in neural networks with a deep network topology provided the best model performance. Although the use of NDVI as a single input factor may cause uncertainty in some extents, it is an efficient and reliable method for improving yield estimation with the use of medium-resolution satellites, which has important implications for early warning towards the reduction in yield production.

Recent advances in land use and land cover (LULC) classification with remote sensing imagery are driven by state-of-the-art models such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). Advanced CNN architecture like ResNet can enhance overall classification performance by incorporating residual skip connections. The integration of 3D feature extraction and ResNet architecture suggests a potential improvement in classification tasks. This paper explores the potential of the 3D ResNet model for LULC classification, comparing it with baseline approaches (Support Vector Machine, Random Forest, XGBoost, 1D CNN, 3D CNN) and state-of-the-art 3D models (3D VGG, 3D DenseNet) using WorldView-2 satellite imagery. The 3D ResNet-18 model, fine-tuned via transfer learning on multispectral images, demonstrates significant improvements in classification performance over machine learning models. It achieves the highest Overall Accuracy (OA) of 99.66% and Kappa Accuracy (KA) of 99.39% on the primary dataset. Despite having slightly lower performance on the external validation dataset (OA:82.89%, KA:80.05%) than 3D DenseNet, it is highly efficient with processing times of 490.2 minutes and 3.6 minutes for both datasets respectively. McNemar’s test results show 3D ResNet and 3D DenseNet have significant differences in classification performance (p<0.05) against other models consistently for both datasets.