The Dirichlet Obstruction in AdS/CFT

The obstruction for a perturbative reconstruction of the five-dimensional bulk metric starting from the four-dimensional metric at the boundary,that is, the Dirichlet problem, is computed in dimensions $6\leq d\leq 10$ and some comments are made on its general structure and, in particular, on its relationship with the conformal anomaly, which we compute in dimension $d=8$.Comment: 13 pages, references added (this paper supersedes hep-th/0206140, "A Note on the Bach Tensor in AdS/CFT", which has been withdrawn

S3S_3 discrete group as a source of the quark mass and mixing pattern in 331331 models

We propose a model based on the $SU(3)_{C}\otimes SU(3)_{L}\otimes U(1)_{X}$ gauge symmetry with an extra $S_{3}\otimes Z_{2}\otimes Z_{4}\otimes Z_{12}$ discrete group, which successfully accounts for the SM quark mass and mixing pattern. The observed hierarchy of the SM quark masses and quark mixing matrix elements arises from the $Z_{4}$ and $Z_{12}$ symmetries, which are broken at very high scale by the $SU(3)_{L}$ scalar singlets ($\sigma$,$\zeta$) and $\tau$, charged under these symmetries, respectively. The Cabbibo mixing arises from the down type quark sector whereas the up quark sector generates the remaining quark mixing angles. The obtained magnitudes of the CKM matrix elements, the CP violating phase and the Jarlskog invariant are in agreement with the experimental data.Comment: 12 pages. Version published in European Physical Journal

A systematic mapping study on testing technique experiments: has the situation changed since 2000?

Context: Empirical Software Engineering (ESE) replication researchers need to store and manipulate experimental data for several purposes, in particular analysis and reporting. Current research needs call for sharing and preservation of experimental data as well. In a previous work, we analyzed Replication Data Management (RDM) needs. A novel concept, called Experimental Ecosystem, was proposed to solve current deficiencies in RDM approaches. The empirical ecosystem provides replication researchers with a common framework that integrates transparently local heterogeneous data sources. A typical situation where the Empirical Ecosystem is applicable, is when several members of a research group, or several research groups collaborating together, need to share and access each other experimental results. However, to be able to apply the Empirical Ecosystem concept and deliver all promised benefits, it is necessary to analyze the software architectures and tools that can properly support it

Eficacia del diclofenaco tópico vs. nepafenaco tópico en la reducción del dolor durante la fotocoagulación panretiniana

ResumenPropósitoComparar la eficacia del diclofenaco tópico 0.1% vs. nepafenaco tópico en reducir el dolor asociado a la fotocoagulación panretiniana con láser argón.Material y métodosEnsayo clínico aleatorizado doble enmascarado, 132 pacientes (183 ojos) con diagnóstico de retinopatía diabética proliferativa tratados con fotocoagulación panretiniana. Aleatorización en 2 grupos: diclofenaco y nepafenaco tópicos. Se aplicaron 2 dosis de los analgésicos tópicos previas a la fotocoagulación panretiniana, se evaluó el dolor inmediatamente y 15min después. Se analizó nivel de dolor, efectos adversos y síntomas asociados al finalizar la fotocoagulación retiniana.ResultadosLa mediana de la edad para ambos grupos fue de 55 años, relación H:M de 1:1.4. El nivel de dolor inmediato fue de 35.5 (RIC 14-72) para el nepafenaco y de 45 (RIC 14-70) para el diclofenaco (p=0.48). A los 15min fue de 30 (RIC 4-50) para el nepafenaco y de 20 (RIC 2-50) para el diclofenaco (p=0.48). No hubo diferencias significativas en síntomas asociados entre los grupos ni efectos adversos en la superficie ocular.ConclusionesEl tratamiento previo con nepafenaco y diclofenaco tópicos es igualmente eficaz y seguro para reducir el dolor asociado a la fotocoagulación panretiniana en pacientes con retinopatía diabética proliferativa.AbstractPurposeTo compare the efficacy of topical diclofenac 0.1% vs topical nepafenac in reducing pain associated to argon laser retinal photocoagulationMaterial and methodsDouble blinded, randomized clinical trial. One hundred thirty two patients with diagnosis of proliferative diabetic retinopathy treated with retinal photocoagulation. Randomization in to 2 groups: topical diclofenac and nepafenac. Before retinal photocoagulation 2 doses of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were applied, pain was assessed immediately and 15minutes after. Level of pain, adverse effects and associated symptoms at the end of retinal photocoagulation were analyzed.ResultsThe median for age in both groups was 55 years, M:F ratio of 1:1.4. The immediate level of pain was 35.5 (ICR 14-72) for nepafenac and 45 (ICR 14-70) for diclofenac (P=.48). At 15minutes the pain level was 30 (ICR 4-50) for nepafenac and 20 (ICR 2-50) for diclofenac. There was no difference in associated symptoms or adverse effects among groups.ConclusionsThe preventive treatment with topical nepafenac and diclofenac is equally effective and safe for reducing the pain associated with retinal photocoagulation in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy

Rudiments of Holography

An elementary introduction to Maldacena's AdS/CFT correspondence is given, with some emphasis in the Fefferman-Graham construction. This is based on lectures given by one of us (E.A.) at the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid.Comment: 60 pages, additional misprints corrected, references adde

Sucesiones de potencias iterativas generadas por a

En el presente trabajo se estudia la sucesión de potencias iterativas generadas por xn = {a si n = 1 a×n-¹ si n ≥ 2 de potencias iterativas generadas por a, a > 0; así como el rango de solubilidad de la ecuación x× = b Se establece que estos problemas están estrechamente ligados con el comportamiento de las funciones f(x) = x¹ y h(x) = x× y con el antiguo problema de determinar las soluciones de la ecuación Xy = y×. Finalmente, se estudia el comportamiento de la función g(x) = x× se calcula su inversa y se construye su gráfica

SUCESIONES DE POTENCIAS ITERATIVAS GENERADAS POR a.

In this paper we study the sequence   of iterated exponentials by a, a > 0; as well as the range of solvability of the equations We state that these two problems are closely related with the behavior of the functions and with the old problem of finding the solutions of the equation . Finally, we study the behavior of the function. calculate its inverse and draw its graph.    En el presente trabajo se estudia la sucesión de potencias iterativas generadas por a, a > 0; así como el rango de solubilidad de la ecuación Se establece que estos problemas están estrechamente ligados con el comportamientode las funciones y con el antiguo problema de determinar las soluciones de la ecuación  Finalmente, se estudia el comportamiento de la función &nbsp

Application of ontologies for the integration of network monitoring platforms

This is an electronic version of the paper presented at the European Workshop on Mechanisms for Mastering Future Internet, held in Salzburg on 2008This paper presents an ontology-based approach to integrate the measurements provided by different network monitoring tools and platforms. The combination of such measurements is valuable to network operators, enabling the development of new management applications. The use of ontologies provides some advantages over current syntactic solutions: classification, inference and querying capabilities are some of them. Moreover, they can reduce the complexity of information integration, providing solutions that can be applied to existing network monitoring infrastructures.This work has been partially funded by the European Union under the project FP7-MOMENT (INFSO-ICT-215225)

Agri-food 4.0: A survey of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture

[EN] The term "Agri-Food 4.0" is an analogy to the term Industry 4.0; coming from the concept "agriculture 4.0". Since the origins of the industrial revolution, where the steam engines started the concept of Industry 1.0 and later the use of electricity upgraded the concept to Industry 2.0, the use of technologies generated a milestone in the industry revolution by addressing the Industry 3.0 concept. Hence, Industry 4.0, it is about including and integrating the latest developments based on digital technologies as well as the interoperability process across them. This allows enterprises to transmit real-time information in terms behaviour and performance. Therefore, the challenge is to maintain these complex networked structures efficiently linked and organised within the use of such technologies, especially to identify and satisfy supply chain stakeholders dynamic requirements. In this context, the agriculture domain is not an exception although it possesses some specialities depending from the domain. In fact, all agricultural machinery incorporates electronic controls and has entered to the digital age, enhancing their current performance. In addition, electronics, using sensors and drones, support the data collection of several agriculture key aspects, such as weather, geographical spatialization, animals and crops behaviours, as well as the entire farm life cycle. However, the use of the right methods and methodologies for enhancing agriculture supply chains performance is still a challenge, thus the concept of Industry 4.0 has evolved and adapted to agriculture 4.0 in order analyse the behaviours and performance in this specific domain. Thus, the question mark on how agriculture 4.0 support a better supply chain decision-making process, or how can help to save time to farmer to make effective decision based on objective data, remains open. Therefore, in this survey, a review of more than hundred papers on new technologies and the new available supply chains methods are analysed and contrasted to understand the future paths of the Agri-Food domain.Authors of this publication acknowledge the contribution of the Project 691249, RUC-APS "Enhancing and implementing Knowledge based ICT solutions within high Risk and Uncertain Conditions for Agriculture Production Systems" (www.ruc-aps.eu), funded by the European Union under their funding scheme H2020-MSCARISE-2015.Lezoche, M.; Hernández, JE.; Alemany Díaz, MDM.; Panetto, H.; Kacprzyk, J. (2020). Agri-food 4.0: A survey of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture. Computers in Industry. 117:1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2020.103187S115117Ahumada, O., & Villalobos, J. R. (2009). Application of planning models in the agri-food supply chain: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 196(1), 1-20. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2008.02.014Ait-Mouheb, N., Bahri, A., Thayer, B. B., Benyahia, B., Bourrié, G., Cherki, B., … Harmand, J. (2018). The reuse of reclaimed water for irrigation around the Mediterranean Rim: a step towards a more virtuous cycle? Regional Environmental Change, 18(3), 693-705. doi:10.1007/s10113-018-1292-zAli, J., & Kumar, S. (2011). Information and communication technologies (ICTs) and farmers’ decision-making across the agricultural supply chain. International Journal of Information Management, 31(2), 149-159. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.07.008Alzahrani, S. M. (2018). Development of IoT mining machine for Twitter sentiment analysis: Mining in the cloud and results on the mirror. 2018 15th Learning and Technology Conference (L&T). doi:10.1109/lt.2018.8368490Amandeep, Bhattacharjee, A., Das, P., Basu, D., Roy, S., Ghosh, S., … Rana, T. K. (2017). Smart farming using IOT. 2017 8th IEEE Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON). doi:10.1109/iemcon.2017.8117219Annosi, M. C., Brunetta, F., Monti, A., & Nati, F. (2019). Is the trend your friend? An analysis of technology 4.0 investment decisions in agricultural SMEs. Computers in Industry, 109, 59-71. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.04.003Baio, F. H. R. (2011). Evaluation of an auto-guidance system operating on a sugar cane harvester. Precision Agriculture, 13(1), 141-147. doi:10.1007/s11119-011-9241-6Belaud, J.-P., Prioux, N., Vialle, C., & Sablayrolles, C. (2019). Big data for agri-food 4.0: Application to sustainability management for by-products supply chain. Computers in Industry, 111, 41-50. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.06.006Nicolaas Bezuidenhout, C., Bodhanya, S., & Brenchley, L. (2012). An analysis of collaboration in a sugarcane production and processing supply chain. British Food Journal, 114(6), 880-895. doi:10.1108/00070701211234390Bhatt, M. R., & Buch, S. (2015). Prediction of formability for sheet metal component using artificial intelligent technique. 2015 2nd International Conference on Signal Processing and Integrated Networks (SPIN). doi:10.1109/spin.2015.7095356Birkel, H. S., & Hartmann, E. (2019). Impact of IoT challenges and risks for SCM. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 24(1), 39-61. doi:10.1108/scm-03-2018-0142Boehlje, M. (1999). Structural Changes in the Agricultural Industries: How Do We Measure, Analyze and Understand Them? American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 81(5), 1028-1041. doi:10.2307/1244080Bonney, L., Clark, R., Collins, R., & Fearne, A. (2007). From serendipity to sustainable competitive advantage: insights from Houston’s Farm and their journey of co‐innovation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 12(6), 395-399. doi:10.1108/13598540710826326Boshkoska, B. M., Liu, S., Zhao, G., Fernandez, A., Gamboa, S., del Pino, M., … Chen, H. (2019). A decision support system for evaluation of the knowledge sharing crossing boundaries in agri-food value chains. Computers in Industry, 110, 64-80. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.04.012Brewster, C., Roussaki, I., Kalatzis, N., Doolin, K., & Ellis, K. (2017). IoT in Agriculture: Designing a Europe-Wide Large-Scale Pilot. IEEE Communications Magazine, 55(9), 26-33. doi:10.1109/mcom.2017.1600528Bronson, K., & Knezevic, I. (2016). Big Data in food and agriculture. Big Data & Society, 3(1), 205395171664817. doi:10.1177/2053951716648174Brown, K. (2013). Global environmental change I. Progress in Human Geography, 38(1), 107-117. doi:10.1177/0309132513498837Chilcanan, D., Navas, P., & Escobar, S. M. (2017). Expert system for remote process automation in multiplatform servers, through human machine conversation. 2017 12th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI). doi:10.23919/cisti.2017.7975913Choi, J., In, Y., Park, C., Seok, S., Seo, H., & Kim, H. (2016). Secure IoT framework and 2D architecture for End-To-End security. The Journal of Supercomputing, 74(8), 3521-3535. doi:10.1007/s11227-016-1684-0Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128. doi:10.2307/2393553Dabbene, F., Gay, P., & Tortia, C. (2014). Traceability issues in food supply chain management: A review. Biosystems Engineering, 120, 65-80. doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2013.09.006Del Borghi, A., Gallo, M., Strazza, C., & Del Borghi, M. (2014). An evaluation of environmental sustainability in the food industry through Life Cycle Assessment: the case study of tomato products supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 78, 121-130. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.083Devarakonda, R., Shrestha, B., Palanisamy, G., Hook, L., Killeffer, T., Krassovski, M., … Lazer, K. (2014). OME: Tool for generating and managing metadata to handle BigData. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). doi:10.1109/bigdata.2014.7004476Nascimento, A. F. do, Mendonça, E. de S., Leite, L. F. C., Scholberg, J., & Neves, J. C. L. (2012). Calibration and validation of models for short-term decomposition and N mineralization of plant residues in the tropics. Scientia Agricola, 69(6), 393-401. doi:10.1590/s0103-90162012000600008Dolan, C., & Humphrey, J. (2000). Governance and Trade in Fresh Vegetables: The Impact of UK Supermarkets on the African Horticulture Industry. Journal of Development Studies, 37(2), 147-176. doi:10.1080/713600072Dragincic, J., Korac, N., & Blagojevic, B. (2015). Group multi-criteria decision making (GMCDM) approach for selecting the most suitable table grape variety intended for organic viticulture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 111, 194-202. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2014.12.023Dworak, V., Selbeck, J., Dammer, K.-H., Hoffmann, M., Zarezadeh, A., & Bobda, C. (2013). Strategy for the Development of a Smart NDVI Camera System for Outdoor Plant Detection and Agricultural Embedded Systems. Sensors, 13(2), 1523-1538. doi:10.3390/s130201523Eisele, M., Kiese, R., Krämer, A., & Leibundgut, C. (2001). Application of a catchment water quality model for assessment and prediction of nitrogen budgets. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Part B: Hydrology, Oceans and Atmosphere, 26(7-8), 547-551. doi:10.1016/s1464-1909(01)00048-xElsayed, K. M. F., Ismail, T., & S. Ouf, N. (2018). A Review on the Relevant Applications of Machine Learning in Agriculture. IJIREEICE, 6(8), 1-17. doi:10.17148/ijireeice.2018.681Esteso, A., Alemany, M. M. E., & Ortiz, A. (2017). Métodos y Modelos Deterministas e Inciertos para la Gestión de Cadenas de Suministro Agroalimentarias. Dirección y Organización, 41-46. doi:10.37610/dyo.v0i0.509Esteso, A., Alemany, M. M. E., & Ortiz, A. (2018). Conceptual framework for designing agri-food supply chains under uncertainty by mathematical programming models. International Journal of Production Research, 56(13), 4418-4446. doi:10.1080/00207543.2018.1447706GERHARDS, R., GUTJAHR, C., WEIS, M., KELLER, M., SÖKEFELD, M., MÖHRING, J., & PIEPHO, H. P. (2011). Using precision farming technology to quantify yield effects attributed to weed competition and herbicide application. Weed Research, 52(1), 6-15. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.2011.00893.xGovindan, K., Jafarian, A., Khodaverdi, R., & Devika, K. (2014). Two-echelon multiple-vehicle location–routing problem with time windows for optimization of sustainable supply chain network of perishable food. International Journal of Production Economics, 152, 9-28. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.12.028Gumaste, S. S., & Kadam, A. J. (2016). Future weather prediction using genetic algorithm and FFT for smart farming. 2016 International Conference on Computing Communication Control and automation (ICCUBEA). doi:10.1109/iccubea.2016.7860028Hashem, H., & Ranc, D. (2016). A review of modeling toolbox for BigData. 2016 International Conference on Military Communications and Information Systems (ICMCIS). doi:10.1109/icmcis.2016.7496565Hefnawy, A., Elhariri, T., Cherifi, C., Robert, J., Bouras, A., Kubler, S., & Framling, K. (2017). Combined use of lifecycle management and IoT in smart cities. 2017 11th International Conference on Software, Knowledge, Information Management and Applications (SKIMA). doi:10.1109/skima.2017.8294112Hosseini, S. H., Tang, C. Y., & Jiang, J. N. (2014). Calibration of a Wind Farm Wind Speed Model With Incomplete Wind Data. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 5(1), 343-350. doi:10.1109/tste.2013.2284490Hu, Y., Zhang, L., Li, J., & Mehrotra, S. (2016). ICME 2016 Image Recognition Grand Challenge. 2016 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia & Expo Workshops (ICMEW). doi:10.1109/icmew.2016.7574663A. Irmak, J. W. Jones, W. D. Batchelor, S. Irmak, K. J. Boote, & J. O. Paz. (2006). Artificial Neural Network Model as a Data Analysis Tool in Precision Farming. Transactions of the ASABE, 49(6), 2027-2037. doi:10.13031/2013.22264Jeon, S., Kim, B., & Huh, J. (2017). Study on methods to determine rotor equivalent wind speed to increase prediction accuracy of wind turbine performance under wake condition. Energy for Sustainable Development, 40, 41-49. doi:10.1016/j.esd.2017.06.001Joly, P.-B. (2005). Resilient farming systems in a complex world — new issues for the governance of science and innovation. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 45(6), 617. doi:10.1071/ea03252Joshi, R., Banwet, D. K., & Shankar, R. (2009). Indian cold chain: modeling the inhibitors. British Food Journal, 111(11), 1260-1283. doi:10.1108/00070700911001077Kamata, T., Roshanianfard, A., & Noguchi, N. (2018). Heavy-weight Crop Harvesting Robot - Controlling Algorithm. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(17), 244-249. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.165Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Gawankar, S. A. (2020). Achieving sustainable performance in a data-driven agriculture supply chain: A review for research and applications. International Journal of Production Economics, 219, 179-194. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.05.022Kamilaris, A., Kartakoullis, A., & Prenafeta-Boldú, F. X. (2017). A review on the practice of big data analysis in agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 143, 23-37. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2017.09.037Kelepouris, T., Pramatari, K., & Doukidis, G. (2007). RFID‐enabled traceability in the food supply chain. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(2), 183-200. doi:10.1108/02635570710723804Khan, S. F., & Ismail, M. Y. (2018). An Investigation into the Challenges and Opportunities Associated with the Application of Internet of Things (IoT) in the Agricultural Sector-A Review. Journal of Computer Science, 14(2), 132-143. doi:10.3844/jcssp.2018.132.143Kladivko, E. J., Helmers, M. J., Abendroth, L. J., Herzmann, D., Lal, R., Castellano, M. J., … Villamil, M. B. (2014). Standardized research protocols enable transdisciplinary research of climate variation impacts in corn production systems. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 69(6), 532-542. doi:10.2489/jswc.69.6.532Ko, T., Lee, J., & Ryu, D. (2018). Blockchain Technology and Manufacturing Industry: Real-Time Transparency and Cost Savings. Sustainability, 10(11), 4274. doi:10.3390/su10114274KÖK, M. S. (2009). Application of Food Safety Management Systems (ISO 22000/HACCP) in the Turkish Poultry Industry: A Comparison Based on Enterprise Size. Journal of Food Protection, 72(10), 2221-2225. doi:10.4315/0362-028x-72.10.2221Kvíz, Z., Kroulik, M., & Chyba, J. (2014). Machinery guidance systems analysis concerning pass-to-pass accuracy as a tool for efficient plant production in fields and for soil damage reduction. Plant, Soil and Environment, 60(No. 1), 36-42. doi:10.17221/622/2012-pseLamsal, K., Jones, P. C., & Thomas, B. W. (2016). Harvest logistics in agricultural systems with multiple, independent producers and no on-farm storage. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 91, 129-138. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2015.10.018Laube, P., Duckham, M., & Palaniswami, M. (2011). Deferred decentralized movement pattern mining for geosensor networks. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 25(2), 273-292. doi:10.1080/13658810903296630Li, F.-R., Gao, C.-Y., Zhao, H.-L., & Li, X.-Y. (2002). Soil conservation effectiveness and energy efficiency of alternative rotations and continuous wheat cropping in the Loess Plateau of northwest China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 91(1-3), 101-111. doi:10.1016/s0167-8809(01)00265-1Liakos, K., Busato, P., Moshou, D., Pearson, S., & Bochtis, D. (2018). Machine Learning in Agriculture: A Review. Sensors, 18(8), 2674. doi:10.3390/s18082674Meichen, L., Jun, C., Xiang, Z., Lu, W., & Yongpeng, T. (2018). Dynamic obstacle detection based on multi-sensor information fusion. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(17), 861-865. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.086Louwagie, G., Northey, G., Finn, J. A., & Purvis, G. (2012). Development of indicators for assessment of the environmental impact of livestock farming in Ireland using the Agri-environmental Footprint Index. Ecological Indicators, 18, 149-162. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.11.003Luque, A., Peralta, M. E., de las Heras, A., & Córdoba, A. (2017). State of the Industry 4.0 in the Andalusian food sector. Procedia Manufacturing, 13, 1199-1205. doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.195Malhotra, S., Doja, M. ., Alam, B., & Alam, M. (2017). Bigdata analysis and comparison of bigdata analytic approches. 2017 International Conference on Computing, Communication and Automation (ICCCA). doi:10.1109/ccaa.2017.8229821Mayer, J., Gunst, L., Mäder, P., Samson, M.-F., Carcea, M., Narducci, V., … Dubois, D. (2015). «Productivity, quality and sustainability of winter wheat under long-term conventional and organic management in Switzerland». European Journal of Agronomy, 65, 27-39. doi:10.1016/j.eja.2015.01.002McGuire, S., & Sperling, L. (2013). Making seed systems more resilient to stress. Global Environmental Change, 23(3), 644-653. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.02.001Mekala, M. S., & Viswanathan, P. (2017). A Survey: Smart agriculture IoT with cloud computing. 2017 International conference on Microelectronic Devices, Circuits and Systems (ICMDCS). doi:10.1109/icmdcs.2017.8211551Mishra, S., Mishra, D., & Santra, G. H. (2016). Applications of Machine Learning Techniques in Agricultural Crop Production: A Review Paper. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(38). doi:10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i38/95032Mocnej, J., Seah, W. K. G., Pekar, A., & Zolotova, I. (2018). Decentralised IoT Architecture for Efficient Resources Utilisation. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(6), 168-173. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.07.148Mohanraj, I., Gokul, V., Ezhilarasie, R., & Umamakeswari, A. (2017). Intelligent drip irrigation and fertigation using wireless sensor networks. 2017 IEEE Technological Innovations in ICT for Agriculture and Rural Development (TIAR). doi:10.1109/tiar.2017.8273682Montecinos, J., Ouhimmou, M., Chauhan, S., & Paquet, M. (2018). Forecasting multiple waste collecting sites for the agro-food industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 932-939. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.127Yandun Narváez, F., Gregorio, E., Escolà, A., Rosell-Polo, J. R., Torres-Torriti, M., & Auat Cheein, F. (2018). Terrain classification using ToF sensors for the enhancement of agricultural machinery traversability. Journal of Terramechanics, 76, 1-13. doi:10.1016/j.jterra.2017.10.005Nguyen, T., ZHOU, L., Spiegler, V., Ieromonachou, P., & Lin, Y. (2018). Big data analytics in supply chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. Computers & Operations Research, 98, 254-264. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2017.07.004Nilsson, E., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Mochizuki, J., & Uvo, C. B. (2016). Hydro-climatic variability and agricultural production on the shores of Lake Chad. Environmental Development, 20, 15-30. doi:10.1016/j.envdev.2016.09.001Nolan, P., Paley, D. A., & Kroeger, K. (2017). Multi-UAS path planning for non-uniform data collection in precision agriculture. 2017 IEEE Aerospace Conference. doi:10.1109/aero.2017.7943794Oberholster, C., Adendorff, C., & Jonker, K. (2015). Financing Agricultural Production from a Value Chain Perspective. Outlook on Agriculture, 44(1), 49-60. doi:10.5367/oa.2015.0197Opara, L. U., & Mazaud, F. (2001). Food Traceability from Field to Plate. Outlook on Agriculture, 30(4), 239-247. doi:10.5367/000000001101293724Ott, K.-H., Aranı́bar, N., Singh, B., & Stockton, G. W. (2003). Metabonomics classifies pathways affected by bioactive compounds. Artificial neural network classification of NMR spectra of plant extracts. Phytochemistry, 62(6), 971-985. doi:10.1016/s0031-9422(02)00717-3Panetto, H. (2007). Towards a classification framework for interoperability of enterprise applications. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 20(8), 727-740. doi:10.1080/09511920600996419Paulraj, G. J. L., Francis, S. A. J., Peter, J. D., & Jebadurai, I. J. (2018). Resource-aware virtual machine migration in IoT cloud. Future Generation Computer Systems, 85, 173-183. doi:10.1016/j.future.2018.03.024Pilli, S. K., Nallathambi, B., George, S. J., & Diwanji, V. (2015). eAGROBOT — A robot for early crop disease detection using image processing. 2015 2nd International Conference on Electronics and Communication Systems (ICECS). doi:10.1109/ecs.2015.7124873Pinho, P., Dias, T., Cruz, C., Sim Tang, Y., Sutton, M. A., Martins-Loução, M.-A., … Branquinho, C. (2011). Using lichen functional diversity to assess the effects of atmospheric ammonia in Mediterranean woodlands. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48(5), 1107-1116. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02033.xPrathibha, S. R., Hongal, A., & Jyothi, M. P. (2017). IOT Based Monitoring System in Smart Agriculture. 2017 International Conference on Recent Advances in Electronics and Communication Technology (ICRAECT). doi:10.1109/icraect.2017.52Reardon, T., Echeverria, R., Berdegué, J., Minten, B., Liverpool-Tasie, S., Tschirley, D., & Zilberman, D. (2019). Rapid transformation of food systems in developing regions: Highlighting the role of agricultural research & innovations. Agricultural Systems, 172, 47-59. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.022Ribarics, P. (2016). Big Data and its impact on agriculture. Ecocycles, 2(1), 33-34. doi:10.19040/ecocycles.v2i1.54Rosell, J. R., & Sanz, R. (2012). A review of methods and applications of the geometric characterization of tree crops in agricultural activities. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 81, 124-141. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2011.09.007Roshanianfard, A., Kamata, T., & Noguchi, N. (2018). Performance evaluation of harvesting robot for heavy-weight crops. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(17), 332-338. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.200Routroy, S., & Behera, A. (2017). Agriculture supply chain. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 7(3), 275-302. doi:10.1108/jadee-06-2016-0039Ruiz-Garcia, L., Steinberger, G., & Rothmund, M. (2010). A model and prototype implementation for tracking and tracing agricultural batch products along the food chain. Food Control, 21(2), 112-121. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2008.12.003Saggi, M. K., & Jain, S. (2018). A survey towards an integration of big