What’s the Difference Between Vertical Farming and Machine Learning? – Electronic Design

What youll learn

Sometimes inspiration comes in the oddest ways. I like to watch CBS News Sunday Morning because of the variety of stories they air. Recently, they did one on Vertical Farming - A New Form of Agriculture (see video below).

CBS News Sunday Morning recently did a piece on vertical farming that spawned this article.

For those who didnt watch the video, vertical farming is essentially a method of indoor farming using hydroponics. Hydroponics isnt new; its a subset of hydroculture where crops are grown without soil. Instead, the plants grow in a mineral-enriched water. This can be done in conjunction with sunlight but typically an artificial light source is used.

The approach is useful in areas that dont provide enough light, or at times or in locations where the temperature or conditions outside would not be conducive for growing plants.

Vertical farming is hydroponics taken to the extreme, with stacks upon stacks of trays with plants under an array of lights. These days, the lights typically are LEDs because of their efficiency and the ability to generate the type of light most useful for plant growth. Automation can be used to streamline planting, support, and harvesting.

A building can house a vertical farm anywhere in the world, including in the middle of a city. Though lots of water is required, its recycled, making it more efficient than other forms of agriculture.

Like many technologies, the opportunities are great if you ignore the details. Thats where my usual contrary nature came into play, though, since I followed up my initial interest by looking for limitations or problems related to vertical farming. Of course, I found quite a few and then noticed that many of the general issues applied to another topic I cover a lotmachine learning/artificial intelligence (ML/AI).

If you made it this far, you know how Im looking at the difference between machine learning and vertical farming. They obviously have no relationship in terms of their technology and implementation, but they do have much in common when one looks at the potential problems and solutions related to those technologies.

As electronic system designers and developers, we constantly deal with potential solutions and their tradeoffs. Machine learning is one of those generic categories that has proven useful in many instances. However, one must be wary of the issues underlying those flashy approaches.

Vertical farming, like machine learning, is something one can dabble in. To be successful, though, it helps to have an expert or at least someone who can quickly gain that experience. This tends to be the case with new and renewed technologies in general. I suspect significantly more ML experts are available these days for a number of reasons like the cost of hardware, but the demand remains high.

Vertical farming uses a good bit of computer automation. The choice of plants, fertilizers, and other aspects of hydropic farming are critical to the success of the farm. Then theres the maintenance aspect. ML-based solutions are one way of reducing the expertise or time required by the staff to support the system.

ML programmers and developers also are able to obtain easier-to-use tools, thereby reducing the amount of expertise and training required to take advantage of ML solutions. These tools often incorporate their own ML models, which are different than those being generated.

Hydroponics works well for many plants, but unfortunately for multiple others, thats not the case. For example, crops like microgreens work well. However, a cherry or apple tree often struggles with this treatment.

ML suffers from the same problem in that its not applicable to all computational chores. But, unlike vertical farms, ML applications and solutions are more diverse. The challenge for developers comes down to understanding where ML is and isnt applicable. Trying to force-fit a machine-learning model to handle a particular problem can result in a solution that provides poor results at high cost.

Vertical farms require power for lighting and to move liquid. ML applications tend to do lots of computation and thus require a good deal of power compared to other computational requirements. One big difference between the two is that ML solutions are scalable and hardware tradeoffs can be significant.

For example, ML hardware can improve performance thats orders of magnitude better than software solutions while reducing power requirements. Likewise, even software-only solutions may be efficient enough to do useful work even while using little power, simply because developers have made the ML models work within the limitations of their design. Vertical farms do not have this flexibility.

Large vertical farms do require a major investment, and theyre not cheap to run due to their scale. The same is true for cloud-based ML solutions utilizing the latest in disaggregated cloud-computing centers. Such data centers are leveraging technologies like SmartNIC and smart storage to use ML models closer to communication and storage than was possible in the past.

The big difference with vertical farming versus ML is scalability. Its now practical for multiple ML models to be running in a smartwatch with a dozen sensors. But that doesnt compare to dealing with agriculture that must scale with the rest of the physical world requirements, such as the plants themselves.

Still, these days, ML does require a significant investment with respect to development and developing the experience to adequately apply ML. Software and hardware vendors have been working to lower both the startup and long-term development costs, which has been further augmented by the plethora of free software tools and low-cost hardware thats now generally available.

Cut the power on a vertical farm and things come to a grinding halt rather quickly, although its not like having an airplane lose power at 10,000 feet. Still, plants do need sustenance and light, though theyre accustomed to changes over time. Nonetheless, responding to failures within the system is important to the systems long-term usefulness.

ML applications tend to require electricity to run, but that tends to be true of the entire system. A more subtle problem with ML applications is the source of input, which is typically sensors such as cameras, temperature sensors, etc. Determining whether the input data is accurate can be challenging; in many cases, designers simply assume that this information is accurate. Applications such as self-driving cars often use redundant and alternative inputs to provide a more robust set of inputs.

Vertical-farming technology continues to change and become more refined, but its still maturing. The same is true for machine learning, though the comparison is like something between a penny bank and Fort Knox. There are simply more ML solutions, many of which are very mature with millions of practical applications.

That said, ML technologies and applications are so varied, and the rate of change so large, that keeping up with whats availablelet alone how things work in detailcan be overwhelming.

Vertical farming is benefiting from advances in technology from robotics to sensors to ML. The ability to track plant growth, germination, and detecting pests are just a few tasks that apply across all of agriculture, including vertical farming.

As with many Whats the Difference articles, the comparisons are not necessarily one-to-one, but hopefully you picked up something about ML or vertical farms that was of interest. Many issues dont map well, like problems of pollination for vertical farms. Though the output of vertical farms will likely feed some ML developers, ML is likely to play a more important part in vertical farming given the level of automation possible with sensors, robots, and ML monitoring now available.

Read more from the original source:
What's the Difference Between Vertical Farming and Machine Learning? - Electronic Design