You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Sensors
  • Review
  • Open Access

Published: 15 January 2023

The Digital Twin Paradigm Applied to Soil Quality Assessment: A Systematic Literature Review

,
,
and
1
Research Center for Digitization and Intelligent Robotics (CeDRI), 5300-253 Bragança, Portugal
2
Robotics Group, Engineering School, University of León, Campus de Vegazana, 24071 León, Spain
3
Laboratório para a Sustentabilidade e Tecnologia em Regiões de Montanha (SusTEC), 5300-253 Bragança, Portugal
4
Instituto Politécnico de Bragança, Campus de Santa Apolónia, 5300-253 Bragança, Portugal
This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensors in 2023

Abstract

This article presents the results regarding a systematic literature review procedure on digital twins applied to precision agriculture. In particular, research and development activities aimed at the use of digital twins, in the context of predictive control, with the purpose of improving soil quality. This study was carried out through an exhaustive search of scientific literature on five different databases. A total of 158 articles were extracted as a result of this search. After a first screening process, only 11 articles were considered to be aligned with the current topic. Subsequently, these articles were categorised to extract all relevant information, using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses methods. Based on the obtained results, there are two main conclusions to draw: First, when compared with industrial processes, there is only a very slight rising trend regarding the use of digital twins in agriculture. Second, within the time frame in which this work was carried out, it was not possible to find any published paper on the use of digital twins for soil quality improvement within a model predictive control context.

1. Introduction

According to [], the underlying concept of digital twins was born after a presentation of M. Grieves at the University of Michigan in the early 2000s. Initially referred to as the “Mirrored Spaces Model”, this paradigm was presented in the context of product lifecycle management, where each system could be decomposed in two components: the physical system and its mirrored virtual entity where all the information about the system’s states could be reached [,]. Later, in [], M. Grieves alluded to the same concept using the alternative term “digital twin”, which was put forward by J. Vickers, a NASA technologist in advanced materials []. For this reason, many authors credit NASA, the United States of America National Aeronautics and Space Administration, with coining the term “digital twin” [,,]. Grieves and Vickers worked together on adapting the concept of digital twins in the manufacturing sector to improve product lifecycle management []. Recently, in the Industry 4.0 technological umbrella, digital twins was presented as a way to increase productivity, efficiency, and adaptability [,,,,,]. The use of digital twins has been reported in the manufacturing process [] of the automotive and energy [] or even aerospace and health [] industries.
At its basic level, digital twins can be seen as realistic virtual representations (digital replicas) of entities with physical or logical existence, such as machines or processes. This virtual representation is accomplished by modelling the processes and assets using a broad range of different mathematical models and feeding them with massive amounts of real-world data. At the present, those data sets can be obtained through real-time data acquisition systems based on Internet of Things (IoT) technologies [,]. A digital twin model presents a data flow that automatically fluxes from the virtual entity to the physical entity, and the same process happens in the opposite direction, from the physical entity to the virtual entity [,].
The implementation of the digital twin enables experimental process testing that facilitates the discovery of optimisation points and process simulation. Moreover, the digital system’s profile can be seen as a fundamental component in a closed-loop control strategy, where the information provided by the digital twin may lead to physical actions that drive changes in the manufacturing processes. In addition, it also enables a complete understanding of the system’s operating mechanisms and contributes to increasing agility and robustness in response to disturbances [,]. Digital twins can also be used to investigate the status history and simulate future habits. In this way, they are implemented as a way of answering hypothetical questions and providing spontaneous revelations [].
Extrapolation from the industrial realm to primary sectors, such as agriculture, is a natural step to take. Indeed, for agricultural processes, the same goals of productivity increase and product quality control are typical concerns. For this reason, agriculture virtualisation comes as a natural response since it seems to be a direct proportional relationship between productivity and agriculture digitalisation [,,]. The societal relevance of this approach is translated by the amount of funding provided for research in this area. Among many others, the IoF2020 European project is an example where digital twins are employed in the agri-food area [,].
As in many other sectors, agriculture has seen an increase in data collection for decision support. For example, through the deployment of local sensors and drones to access weather data and satellite images from remote servers, growers now have access to more information about the climate, soil, and crop vegetative states. In some way, these conditions converge to promote and speed up the integration of digital twins in agricultural processes. However, despite all this potential, their use in this context is still at an early stage of deployment [,,]. There are several reasons that can be pointed out regarding why the use of digital twins in agriculture has not yet taken a quantitative leap. On one hand, agricultural processes are usually more complex than industrial processes. This complexity is not only due to the high dimensionality of the data but also to the fact that many of the variables involved, which strongly condition the behaviour of the processes, are stochastic in nature and cannot be manipulated or controlled. Moreover, the large area in which agriculture processes take place, in conjunction with the heterogeneous conditions found along those terrains, requires spacial and temporal data resolutions that are not technically and economically feasible. In this frame of reference, the present paper aims to present the results concerning a systematic literature review on digital twins in the context of precision agriculture.
In general, the concept of precision agriculture is tightly connected to crop management paradigms, where a layer of information technology is added on top of standard production processes. Spatial and temporal information, obtained from a myriad of different sources, can be integrated into machine learning and artificial intelligence algorithms to attain surgical control over all operational aspects of the production activities. With this new approach, it is expected to reduce the input of chemicals (for weed control, plant protection against pests and diseases, and fertilisation) and the consequent negative effects on soil health and overall biodiversity while maintaining crop profitability and good-quality food. Indeed, the information provided by these new approaches would support farmer’s decision making regarding site-specific management practices, thus allowing them to use resources more efficiently and with less environmental impact.
The focus will be narrowed down to the published research that targets the use of such an approach for promoting the soil quality. Soil quality and soil health are often used synonymously, and are two terms very difficult to define due to the extreme complexity of the soil ecosystem []. A healthy soil is generally defined as a soil with capacity to provide ecosystem services for all forms of life, while soil quality concerns the capacity of a specific soil to sustain a particular use, such as crop production []. Therefore, soil health/quality are two important parameters that affect the production of resources in agricultural fields. Recently, both soil health/quality have been receiving increasing interest from the scientific and political community. Indeed, in recent decades, soils around the world have been subject to severe and quick degradation processes, mostly due to climate change, land-use changes, and the implementation of unsustainable agricultural practices, such as the use of synthetic chemical fertilisers and soil tillage, among others []. These practices have triggered a series of cascading effects within the ecosystem, such as soil erosion, nutrient and moisture depletion, degradation, and loss of biodiversity []. It is therefore of primary importance to act in order to improve and/or restore the “health” and “quality” of soils. In this regard, precision agriculture and digital agriculture can play an important role. Soil quality is a very broad and generic term as it can be considered from a chemical, physical and biological perspective, or any combination of the three. In the current context of this work, soil quality will be measured based on the distance between the ideal chemical and physical characteristics for a healthy soil in olive oil production, in addition to the effectively observed characteristics. Regarding physical quantities, we speak, for example, of the temperature and relative humidity of the soil at different depths and electro-conductivities. From a chemical point of view, the pH and dissolved oxygen will be considered. Moreover, the concentration of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium will also be measured. Effects due to mechanical activities, such as ploughing and tilling, which cannot be performed automatically, will not be taken into consideration.
In this work, particular interest will be directed to situations where the dynamic behaviour of the process, translated by a digital twin, is included in a closed-loop control strategy based on predictions generated by that model.
This systematic review has targeted publications made since the year 2016 using five different databases. Details regarding the methodology applied to carry out the systematic review of the literature, the planning, and the conduction process are provided in Section 2. Section 3 presents the results and their respective discussion. After an analysis of the selected articles and the application of the selection criteria, a rigorous discussion of the subject is presented. Finally, in Section 4, we highlight our final conclusions and remarks.

2. Applied Methodology

A systematic literature review (SLR) is a tool used to evaluate and interpret all accessible and relevant research for the occurrences of keywords of interest and/or search questions. Using the systematic literature review method instituted by Kitchenham, this work was elaborated [,,,]. The paths to developing an SLR are divided into three main steps: planning, conducting, and reporting the review. Each of the phases plays an important role in the final review. The SLR’s mission is to present an assessment of a research topic by applying a methodology seen as reliable, accurate, and able to be audited [,,,].
It is very important to carry out a preliminary search in a database available on the internet to identify if there is an SLR with an identical research topic. This should be performed before starting SLR planning. A new search would be unnecessary if a similar SLR already exists [,,]. In the case of this SLR, several results were found for the theme “Digital Twins in Agriculture”. Modifications were made so that the topic became more restricted. For the new theme, “Digital Twins in Precision Agriculture for Soil Quality Improvement”, no identical results were found.

2.1. Review Planning

The SLR planning is divided into the definition of the search questions; the elaboration of the PICOC; the selection of keywords and synonyms; the determination of inclusion and exclusion criteria for articles from this systematic literature review; the creation of the search string; the choice of search sources; quality assessment; and the data extraction form.

2.1.1. Definition of Search Questions

In review planning, the process of identifying and defining the review execution modes is determined, so that the review is completely replicable and traceable []. In the first step, it is necessary to specify the research question to be investigated. The research questions (RQs) are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Key phrases used in the database query. Questions.

2.1.2. Preparation of the PICOC Method

In the second stage, after the determination of the QRs, the PICOC methodology was applied to define the purpose of the review. This methodology helps in the article analysis process and was developed and described by Petticrew and Roberts []). Its characterisation is shown as:
  • Population (P): Who?
  • Intervention (I): What and how?
  • Comparison (C): What to compare?
  • Result (O): What are the final goals you seek to achieve?
  • Context (C): What are the contexts?
The PICOC method, previously defined, will be used in this search, and is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. The PICOC method.

2.1.3. Selection of Keywords and Synonyms

In the third step, the keywords were defined. Table 3 presents the results of the keywords and their corresponding synonyms, in addition to relating them to the PICOC method.
Table 3. Selection of keywords and synonyms.

2.1.4. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

To define the relevant articles and relate them to the research questions, the inclusion (IC) and exclusion (EC) rules were established. If the article meets any of the following criteria, it must be included or withdrawn from the study. The inclusion criteria are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Inclusion criteria.
The exclusion criteria are presented in Table 5.
Table 5. Exclusion criteria.
The articles were found and extracted from the libraries, to which the inclusion (IC) and exclusion (EC) criteria were applied. In this step, it is necessary to read the abstract and the keywords to define the relevant articles. Finally, they were accepted to integrate the following steps of the final systematic review under study.

2.1.5. Quality Criteria

In this stage, quality criteria are applied based on questions of verification and an analysis of the selected paper quality. The article needs to be read completely, and the questions must be very specific, with each one having a specific score. The quality questions (QQ) are presented in Table 6.
Table 6. Quality Questions.
The answer can have three different values: 1.0 (highest score) if the question is completely answered, 0.5 (medium score) if the question is partially answered, and 0.0 (lowest score) if the question is not answered.
All questions can be answered with “yes” or “no”. The first three questions are more comprehensive (QQ1, QQ2, QQ3). The following questions are more specific (QQ4, QQ5, QQ6, QQ7, QQ8, QQ9).
The questions QQ4, QQ5, QQ6, QQ7, QQ8, and QQ9 have high relevance in determining the quality of the publications under study because they answer the main topics of interest in this systematic review. The sum of the maximum score of these questions corresponds to a score of 6.0.
Based on the quality criteria, the cut-off score is 6.0 for any article. In this way, all publications that have a grade greater than 6.0 are added to the final SLR. Furthermore, those with a lower score are excluded. Likewise, the maximum score for any article was defined as 9.0. Therefore, no article can score higher than that. The results of this quality criteria step are presented in Table 3 of Section 3.

2.1.6. Data Extraction Form

The final step of SLR planning is data extraction, in which new data extraction questions must be created to determine meaningful information and extract it. Data extraction issues (DQ) are determined, as follows, in Table 7.
Table 7. Data extraction questions.
After the data extraction step, the results obtained were organised in a table format and presented in the results section (Section 3) in Table 4. All the classified articles must present a score equal to or greater than 6.0.

2.2. Conduction

Subsequently, in the planning stage, the process called driving must be carried out. This was carried out following the PRISMA method, which characterises and describes in detail the phases of the driving process. Figure 1 illustrates the process of performing SLR.
Figure 1. Conduction process.
Regarding conduction stages, they are broken down into identification, triage, eligibility, and inclusion.
Upon identification, articles are discovered in each search source using the search string and are saved. Subsequently, repeated articles were removed. In triage, only the title, abstract, and keywords were read in each publication. Then, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, and publications that are not classified by the established criteria are also excluded. For the remaining publications, eligibility was applied to the defined quality issues. Each publication, read in its entirety, had a score assigned. Furthermore, those who do not obtain a minimum score above the pre-established limit (6.0) were excluded. Upon inclusion, publications that obtained high value were approved and classified for the final SLR. Eventually, data extractions were performed based on extraction questions.
The instrument used to complete this systematic literature review was the program called “PICO Portal” © (https://picoportal.org/about-us/ (accessed on 6 January 2022)).
In this way, by using this tool, it is possible to organise the steps more easily, plan the review, import the work, and ask questions. Finally, a final report on the review and its main features was prepared, with results being presented in the Results section (Section 3).

Creation of the String and Selection of Search Sources

In this stage, the search strings are created. It is secondly expressed as an equation that evidences all the main terms of the search. To find relevant publications on the topic, this string needs to be tested in each one of the databases. Depending on the website, the search string may vary and require specific uses of characters.The search string created for this systematic review is presented:
(“digital twin”) AND (agriOR cropOR farm) AND (soil OR land OR field OR “fieldmanagement” OR “soil quality”):
These databases are well-known in this field of research: Springer Link, Association for Computing Machinery, ISI Web of Science, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and Scopus. All selected search sources are important and known in the research area, especially in the areas of technology. Furthermore, they are very relevant to the research topic developed in this literature review. Table 8 shows the search phrase used for all digital libraries.
Table 8. Specific search phrases for each digital library.
  • Springer Link (SL): From the Springer Link library (https://link.springer.com/, accessed on 30 May 2022).
    In the first search, the query string was used in the simple search bar of the site, and many results were found. It is necessary to select the option “include content for viewing only”, and also the filters “content type: article” and “discipline: engineering”.
  • Biblioteca Digital—Association for Computing Machinery (ACM): From the Digital ACM library (https://dl.acm.org/, accessed on 30 May 2022).
    The advanced search feature was used and the search string used was highlighted. Furthermore, the “Research Article” filter was applied.
  • ISI Web of Science (WoS): From the ISI Web of Science library (https://access.clarivate.com/, accessed on 30 May 2022).
    The query was performed in the search tab and a search string was added.
  • Digital Library—Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE): From the IEEE Digital Library (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org, accessed on 30 May 2022).
    The search was performed in the simple search bar tab on the site, and the option “ALL” was selected. Furthermore, we added the search strings in the tab.
  • Scopus: From the Scopus library (https://www.scopus.com/, accessed on 30 May 2022).
    An advanced search was performed. The following filters were applied: “article”, “engineering”, “keyword: digital twin”.

3. Results and Discussion

In this section, all the data extracted during the systematic literature review process, through planning and conduction, is presented. Then, the results obtained are shown, followed by respective analyses and discussions.

3.1. Results

In this section, the results obtained in the planning and conduction process are presented. Table 9 presents the number of articles extracted from each library at the beginning of the review process. Furthermore, it shows the percentage of articles selected (in the end) by a library. Figure 2 shows the percentage of articles selected by a library at the end of the review.
Table 9. Percentage of articles by libraries.
Figure 2. Percentage of articles by libraries (at the end of the Review).
In the identification step, the search is performed in five databases using the search string from the obtained results. A total of 158 articles were found, and we removed 28 duplicates.
In the triage stage, we considered the 130 remaining articles, and after the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, 109 articles were excluded. In the eligibility stage, the 21 remaining articles were read in full before a quality assessment was performed (quality questions), in which 10 articles were excluded.
In inclusion, as a result of the filters applied in the previous phases, a total of 11 articles were selected to integrate the systematic literature review and data extraction. Thus, these articles met all the criteria evaluated. The entire conduction process is shown in the diagram of Figure 3.
Figure 3. Results of the conduction process. Source: author.
Table 10 presents the results of the 21 articles selected by the quality assessment, of which 11 were classified for the data extraction stage. Each of the articles that scored more than 6.0 in the answers to the quality questions moved on to the next phase, which contained the most important scoring questions (pre-set along with the quality criteria). Ten articles were excluded for presenting scores below the established limit.
Table 10. Quality Assessment Result.
Table 11 presents the data referring to two stages of the SLR. The first column corresponds to the years in which the articles were published. The second column corresponds to the number of articles selected and the result of the first phase of the systematic review. Furthermore, the third corresponds to the number of articles accepted and the result of the quality criteria stage.
Table 11. Articles Selected and Accepted by year.
Figure 4 symbolises the percentage of articles selected per year through the use of search phrases. Figure 5 symbolises the percentage of articles accepted per year through the application of quality criteria. By analysing these figures, it can be seen that the articles found are very recent.
Figure 4. Percentage of articles selected.
Figure 5. Percentage of articles accepted.
From the scores determined in the previous step, it is possible to calculate the statistical values of the median and average and determine the maximum and minimum values. Furthermore, this also indicates the cut-off score. Table 12 presents the statistical calculations.
Table 12. Statistical Calculations.
Figure 6 illustrates the distribution of quality data. The median score of the 21 articles included in the quality assessment stage was 6.0, and the mean was 6.5.
Figure 6. Distribution of quality data.
The selected articles are those in which the quality questions were applied (to assess) and from which the relevant data were extracted. The selected articles are shown in (Table 13). The articles were obtained at the beginning of the process (of planning and carrying out the review) once they had sufficient quality and affinity within the research questions and quality issues.
Table 13. Selected articles.
The selected articles are shown in Table 13.
In Table 14, all the results obtained with the data extraction process will be indicated. Answers to extraction questions DQ1, DQ2, DQ3, DQ4, DQ5, and DQ6 are presented.
Table 14. Data Extractions Results.
It is important to highlight that the Scopus and Springer Link libraries were the databases in which the largest number of articles were found. The libraries wherein the least amount of articles were found were ACM and IEEE. The articles selected, in the inclusion stage, are mostly very recent, and most of them were published in 2021 and 2022.

3.2. Results Analysis

After applying the data extraction phase for all these articles, information is obtained on all the digital twins found. Table 15 lists all 11 digital twin results found, as well as their respective references. Digital twin applications were mostly related to the cultivation of a specific crop, the use of urban farming techniques, and conceptual reviews.
Table 15. All digital twins and their respective references.
The use of terms related to ontology and multi-agents were often cited in many of the articles [,,]. The terms related to IoT and big data were often cited in [,,,,,]. In addition, the terms related to artificial intelligence and intelligent systems were often cited in [,,,,,].
Table 15 presents the relevant information about each application of digital twins in agriculture, extracted from the last review step and based on the data extraction questions presented in Section 2.1.6. In the first column, each digital twin is related to the questions, and in the second column, each topic is associated with them.
The digital twins listed in Table 15 are described in Table 16, as some digital twins were mentioned in the articles without any detailed information. Table 16 presents the applications of digital twins, in which it was possible to obtain data through the selected works.
Table 16. Research questions results.
At the end of the systematic literature review and after the extraction of data from all accepted articles, the previously proposed research questions (Section 2.1.1) were answered. Furthermore, in Table 16 the results of the research questions are presented with a description of the applications of digital twins (taken from the data extraction phase).
At the end of the systematic literature review and after the extraction of data from all accepted articles, the research questions (Section 2.1.1) were answered. Furthermore, the answers are presented below.
RQ1: In the context of agriculture, what are the applications of digital twins?
Within the context of precision agriculture, they were categorised into different application sectors. The results found are associated with the cultivation of crops, such as wheat and “ginseng berry”. For example, the DT service for rice cultivation was developed, which allows the planning and modelling of the rice cultivation process according to climatic conditions []. A conceptual model of the digital twin is proposed. The proposed DT model is implemented in the laboratory environment for the cultivation of “ginseng berries” []. It describes a prototype system for a DT smart plant and discusses the main results and perspectives for the development of the digital twin system in wheat cultivation. []. The WebGIS framework is presented as an organising principle that connects local data generators and so-called site-specific smart farms to a regional and global networked view of agriculture that can support both the agricultural industry and policymakers in government [].
The results found are used as important tools to boost the state of the art in a specific field. This review describes the state-of-the-art digital twin concepts, along with different digital technologies and techniques in agricultural contexts []. It is a review of emerging and disruptive technologies for urban agriculture []. One study is a review of research work carried out on the application of DT in smart agriculture (predictive analysis in hydroponics) [].
Results related to different applications were found. That is, the use of irrigation presents the primary development of a digital twin for smart agriculture using IoT to control an irrigation system based on farmer decisions and/or AI []. Associated with city-level agriculture, we evaluated the effectiveness of a model-based digital twin approach and a machine learning approach to perform predictive decision analysis to predict urban agriculture production (a scalable aquaponics facility) []. Results were found about controlled-environment agriculture, and the digital twin of the underground farm faithfully represented the reality of the environment through real-time data streams, making it a useful representation for a farm operator []. Finally, concerning sustainable precision agriculture and the environment, the WebGIS framework is an organising principle that connects local data generators and so-called specific smart farms to a regional and global network view of agriculture. This will help to integrate databases located on networks into a system to achieve the necessary SPAE management and connect different fields [].
RQ2: In these digital twins, what are the predictive control techniques and control actions employed?
After analysing the data obtained, the responses were organised in different domains and correlated with the control actions found. The results found are associated with multi-agent technologies: the monitoring and control of plant growth and development in fields using the digital twin. To support the decision-making process and management of agricultural production, ontologies and multi-agents must be used []. Data from the physical world, such as climate, fertiliser, and soil type, as well as information from developed models that simulate soil and crop behaviour, were considered as input data for the digital twin. The digital twin concept also consisted of a soil agent (includes hydrological models and soil data), a crop agent (includes crop models and evaporation data), and a field avatar, which is a digital representation of the field, such as geological models and climate data []. Cyber–physical systems (CPS) are a new type of system, integrating computing, communication, and control components, including sensors, actuators, and network connectors. Modern precision agriculture technologies with daily controlled plant cultivation can significantly improve product quality and agricultural production efficiency. This approach hypothesizes that agronomists and other experts in farm management can model a self-organising process of the entities to be implemented using multi-agent technology. Furthermore, it improves the quality and efficiency of agricultural management decisions [].The results found are related to predictive control, the architecture of necessary for implementation at a farm level, data acquisition, and a pre-processing step. Thus, advanced analysis and modelling predictors can be implemented to allow for global coordination and optimisation. A use-case study is operational management. This case is supported by using real-time data from sensors to perform adaptive control and tactical management []. Within the limitations of the data, crucial variables for tracking and prediction are identified. The data model was introduced, which is essentially a predictive model that predicts extreme temperatures and provides feedback on operational changes that can reduce energy usage and control the farm environment more efficiently. We conclude with a discussion of the development of this digital twin. The five environmental variables that are continuously monitored are temperature, relative humidity, CO2 concentration, airspeed, and light levels []. By using DT, the relationship between nutrient solution temperature and meteorological factors can be found, leading to the development of a predictive model for nutrient solution temperatures. The various methods suggested by hydroponics producers for controlling the temperature of the nutrient solution include the use of centrifugal fans, squirrel-cage fans, or even air conditioners []. The main results found are related to the management of farms, and a monitoring system was developed for a farm that could collect and analyse information. On the farm, there are various devices and systems deployed, such as soil probes, weather stations, irrigation systems, seeders, harvesters, etc., []. The proposed digital twin model was implemented at the laboratory and field levels. According to weather conditions, electrical power is automatically supported or interrupted. The digital twin plays a role in farm management to enable self-monitoring and control of systems. The system is fully controlled and monitored based on digital twins and IoT []. With these architectural advances in farm management, the modern farm can resemble the notion of “digital twins”, which is the confluence of IoT, AI, and big data. Digital twins mean that agricultural operations no longer require physical proximity, which allows for the remote monitoring, control, and coordination of agricultural operations []. The results found are associated with other forms of mitigating actions. This, coupled with the coordination of agricultural operators, means that the digital twin uses simulation and AI to mirror system properties and behaviours in real time, incorporating all the statuses and information of the physical system. With digital twins, agricultural operators do not need to be physically at the agricultural site to monitor, control, coordinate, and run agricultural operations. Any changes to the physical system can be reflected by its digital counterpart. The digital twin will support decision making without the need to create prototypes []. Finally, associated with monitoring the state of nutrients, if the DT is synchronised with a plant (physical), it can adequately reflect its state, such as through regular inspections. They can be used by agronomists to develop and make management decisions in carrying out agro-technical measures based on planning and modelling possible problem situations and finding ways to solve them [].
RQ3: Is this minimisation of the impact caused on the soil based on reducing the application of chemical and mechanical actions?
Within the context of precision agriculture, they were categorised into different actions related to the reduction in impacts on the soil. The results found are related to resource management, such as the implementation of DT in decision making on the efficiency and sustainability of agriculture under global climate change. The platform determines the control of agro-technical conditions, including the determination of the volumes, concentrations, and application rates of fertilisers and phytopharmaceutical products (plant-protection products) as a function of climate []. The use of digital twins makes it possible to determine the parameters that affect the behaviours of the farm and the final production and consumption of resources. This is a key feature that allows farmers to make better decisions and lessen the environmental impacts on resources []. Virtual models of farm operating parameters can guide agricultural operators in making decisions, thus maximising yields and minimising energy and water use. Digital twins can act as safe operating boundary monitoring systems []. Monitoring and evaluating soil quality can reduce the potential use of chemical fertiliser and pesticide dosages, improve groundwater, and protect the environment and human health. This also supports setting the plant density more efficiently. Soil monitoring sensors, such as sensors for moisture, temperature, organic matter, and soil pollutants, can provide soil moisture information that can be used to assess irrigation efficiency in the agricultural field []. The digital plant twin will be created for each field to mirror the actual growth and development of the plant, representing the most anticipated version of the plant development plan, updated daily with data from the weather server, sensors in fields, and observations from agronomists. The main idea of the proposed approach is to consider crop cultivation as a complex adaptive system with collective decisions [].
The results found are related to soil-less cultivation, namely hydroponics and the process of developing a digital twin of a unique underground hydroponic farm. The key to the continued operational success of this farm and similar ventures is finding ways to minimise energy use and maximise crop growth while maintaining optimal growing conditions in which indoor environments are controlled []. Hydroponics is one of the popular soil-less ways to grow plants indoors, which reduces fertiliser usage and provides more protection from pests and adverse weather conditions. It aims to study the environmental performance of various nutrient-recovery methods [].
Results were found related to various actions to reduce impacts on the ground. That is, in urban agriculture, food security, resilience to climate disturbances, environmental sustainability, and positive economic and social outcomes have been identified. By predicting the effect of agricultural policy decisions on social and economic variables [], SPAE will contribute to increasing sustainability, reducing nutrient transport []. Finally, it investigates actions that are related to monitoring the state of nutrients
The project is operated inside the building where the plant is growing in water with nourishment and without any fertiliser, soil, or sunlight. Several sensors are connected to the plant’s control module, which monitors the plant’s nutrient and growth status and external weather conditions as well. []. Knowledge about the microstates of plant development should help to more accurately model and predict plant growth [].

3.3. Discussion

In the present work, a systematic literature review was carried out. This work intended to survey the scientific publications, produced since 2016, that had developed or worked with a soil’s digital twins in the context of smart farming and precision agriculture. Particularly, the interest lies in the use of the soil’s digital twin in the context of a closed-loop predictive control, where this digital twin, fed with real-time data, can be used to carry out short- and long-term forecasts.
Following the methodology used in this review, a total of 158 articles were found and extracted from five different electronic databases: Springer Link, Association for Computing Machinery, ISI Web of Science, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and Scopus. While performing the search, it was possible to build a deeper insight regarding the overall amplitude of this particular researched field and its current state of the art. Moreover, it is important to highlight that the Scopus and Springer Link libraries were the databases in which the largest number of articles were found and classified. Both ACM and IEEE were the libraries in which the least amount of articles was found. In particular, the least-ranked articles were extracted from the ACM Digital Library. It is worth noting that the articles selected during the inclusion stage were mostly recent, since they were published between 2019 and 2022.
After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the quality assessment stage identified 11 relevant articles to be included in the final report review. Among them, the most often cited investigated the cultivation of a specific culture, water management platforms, and urban agriculture techniques, and performed systematic reviews. Moreover, some keywords were found in most articles. For example, the use of ontology- and multi-agent-related terms were often cited in many of the articles [,,]. The terms related to IoT and big data were often cited in most articles [,,,,,]. The words related to artificial intelligence and intelligent systems were also present in the large majority of papers [,,,,,].
In view of this, it can be concluded that the amount of papers associated with the use or development of soil’s digital twin is being gradually increasing. Indeed, after the systematic review carried out in this work, it is possible to conclude that there is a growing trend toward the use of digital twins within various domains and with different goals. However, no studies address the precise problem of soil quality control in general and within a predictive control framework in particular.

4. Conclusions

In the present century, agricultural producers face challenges to preserve water and soil while achieving food safety and promoting sustainability. The latter is being tackled by resorting to more modern farm management and cultivation approaches that jointly use ecological technologies (plant-cover plants that are beneficial to other plants) and precision agriculture. Precision agriculture is a broad concept that includes the use of sensors and information technology to improve the many processes that occur in agriculture, such as irrigation and fertilisation. Sustainability and soil-quality management are strongly dependent on the surgical deployment of fertilisers and/or pesticides, which must be accompanied by an increase in crop yield [].
Taking into consideration the research results that document the application of digital twin paradigms in the industry, it is expected that deploying equivalent approaches in agriculture will lead to an increase in productivity while keeping a leaner trend regarding the use of energy, water, fertilisers, and pesticides. In this framework, digital twins not only will help farmers to increase crop yields but also reduce production costs and allow them to grow crops with better nutritional value [].
Digital twins are still in the process of definition and it seems that the advantages of their use are especially pronounced when standard assets management and control systems are of limited utility [,]. Examples of digital twins that successfully and perfectly match these elements in a complex operational environment are rare or even non-existent.
After a thorough and careful search of several databases, a set of relevant articles aligned with the the use of digital twins in agriculture were found to be available in the scientific literature. Some of those publications are focused on studies and exploratory cases. Some of the points-of-view presented by the authors, such as the use of digital twins to organise, monitor, manage, and maximise agricultural procedures, require further explanation and validation.
According to the literature, the slow penetration of digital twins on agricultural processes occurs due to several reasons, such as low amounts of technical resources, the lack of ease of communication on remote farms, a shortage of economical funding, an unpredictable environment and continuous changes in climate, soil quality, producer resistance in sharing their agricultural information, and the low-level technical qualifications of agricultural growers []. Nevertheless, over the past decade, there are records on the use of digital twin technology employed in the context of smart farming []. Usually, the aim of such an approach is to promote the separation between the physical flows and the planning and control. In particular, providing the grower with the ability to remotely manage all the systems in real time by using virtual information [].
Based on the results obtained from this systematic review, it is possible to conclude that there are no relevant scientific papers published on the use of digital twins for soil-quality management. Moreover, no papers were found regarding the use of such a paradigm in the context of model predictive control for the closed-loop regulation of fertilisers or pesticides.

Author Contributions

All the authors have collaborate in the same way. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by NORTE 2020—FEDER funds, within the project “Man4Health—New management strategies in olive groves for improving soil health and crop yield”, NORTE-01-0145- FEDER-000060. The authors are grateful to the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT, Portugal) for financial support through national funds FCT/MCTES (PIDDAC) to CeDRI (UIDB/05757/2020 and UIDP/05757/2020) and SusTEC (LA/P/0007/2021).

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
ACMAssociation for Computing Machinery
DTDigital Twin
DQData extraction Question
ECExclusion Criteria
ICInclusion Criteria
IEEEInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Internet of Things
IoTInternet of Things
PICOCPopulation, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Context
PRISMAPreferred Report Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses
QQQuality Question
SLRSystematic Literature of Review
RQResearch Question
SLSpringer Link
WoFWeb of Science

References

  1. Grieves, M. Origins of the Digital Twin Concept. Fla. Inst. Technol. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Grieves, M.; Vickers, J. Digital twin: Mitigating unpredictable, undesirable emergent behavior in complex systems. In Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Complex Systems; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 85–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Reyes Yanes, A.; Abbasi, R.; Martinez, P.; Ahmad, R. Digital Twinning of Hydroponic Grow Beds in Intelligent Aquaponic Systems. Sensors 2022, 22, 7393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Grieves, M. Virtually Perfect: Driving Innovative and Lean Products through Product Lifecycle Management; Space Coast Press: Merritt Island, FL, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  5. Piascik, B.; Vickers, J.; Lowry, D.; Scotti, S.; Stewart, J.; Calomino, A. DRAFT Materials, Structures, Mechanical Systems, and Manufacturing Roadmap; Technical Report; National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
  6. Verdouw, C.; Tekinerdogan, B.; Beulens, A.; Wolfert, S. Digital twins in smart farming. Agric. Syst. 2021, 189, 103046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nasirahmadi, A.; Hensel, O. Toward the Next Generation of Digitalization in Agriculture Based on Digital Twin Paradigm. Sensors 2022, 22, 498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Neethirajan, S.; Kemp, B. Digital twins in livestock farming. Animals 2021, 11, 1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Chergui, N.; Kechadi, M.T.; McDonnell, M. The Impact of Data Analytics in Digital Agriculture: A Review. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Multi-Conference on: “Organization of Knowledge and Advanced Technologies” (OCTA), Tunis, Tunisia, 6–8 February 2020; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Horváthová, M.; Lacko, R.; Hajduova, Z. Using Industry 4.0 Concept—Digital Twin—to Improve the Efficiency of Leather Cutting in Automotive Industry. Qual. Innov. Prosper. 2019, 23, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Agavanakis, K.; Cassia, J.; Drombry, M.; Elkaim, E. Telemetry transformation towards Industry 4.0 convergence. A fuel management solution for the transportation sector based on digital twins. AIP Conf. Proc. 2021, 2437, 020083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Abdelmajied, F.Y. Industry 4.0 and Its Implications: Concept, Opportunities, and Future Directions. In Supply Chain; Bányai, T., Ágota, B., Kaczmar, I., Eds.; IntechOpen: Rijeka, Croatia, 2022; Chapter 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Tekinerdogan, B.; Verdouw, C. Systems architecture design pattern catalog for developing digital twins. Sensors 2020, 20, 5103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kritzinger, W.; Karner, M.; Traar, G.; Henjes, J.; Sihn, W. Digital Twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2018, 51, 1016–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Sivalingam, K.; Sepulveda, M.; Spring, M.J.J.; Davies, P. A Review and Methodology Development for Remaining Useful Life Forecast of Offshore Fixed and Floating Wind turbine Power Converter with Digital Twin Technology Perspective. In Proceedings of the 2018 2nd International Conference on Green Energy and Applications (ICGEA), Singapore, 24–26 March 2018; pp. 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ray, P.P. Internet of things for smart agriculture: Technologies, practices and future direction. J. Ambient. Intell. Smart Environ. 2017, 9, 395–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tao, F.; Cheng, J.; Qi, Q.; Zhang, M.; Zhang, H.; Sui, F. Digital twin-driven product design, manufacturing and service with big data. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 94, 3563–3576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Alves, R.G.; Souza, G.; Maia, R.F.; Tran, A.L.H.; Kamienski, C.; Soininen, J.P.; Aquino, P.T.; Lima, F. A digital twin for smart farming. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), Seattle, WA, USA, 17–20 October 2019; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Grieves, M. Digital twin: Manufacturing excellence through virtual factory replication. White Pap. 2014, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  20. Boschert, S.; Rosen, R. Digital twin—The simulation aspect. In Mechatronic Futures; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 59–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Clark, A.; Schultz, E.; Harris, M. What Are Digital Twins; Technical Report; IBM: Armonk, NY, USA, 2019; Available online: https://developer.ibm.com/articles/what-are-digital-twins/ (accessed on 10 June 2022).
  22. Schwab, K. The Fourth Industrial Revolution; Currency: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  23. Trivelli, L.; Apicella, A.; Chiarello, F.; Rana, R.; Fantoni, G.; Tarabella, A. From precision agriculture to Industry 4.0: Unveiling technological connections in the agrifood sector. Br. Food J. 2019, 121, 1730–1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Benyam, A.A.; Soma, T.; Fraser, E. Digital agricultural technologies for food loss and waste prevention and reduction: Global trends, adoption opportunities and barriers. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 323, 129099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Basterrechea, D.A.; Rocher, J.; Parra, M.; Parra, L.; Marin, J.F.; Mauri, P.V.; Lloret, J. Design and Calibration of Moisture Sensor Based on Electromagnetic Field Measurement for Irrigation Monitoring. Chemosensors 2021, 9, 251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Soderstrom, M.; Sohlenius, G.; Rodhe, L.; Piikki, K. Adaptation of regional digital soil mapping for precision agriculture. Precis. Agric. 2016, 17, 588–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kitchenham, B.; Charters, S. Guidelines for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering; Technical Report, Version 2.3; EBSE: Keele, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  28. Cárceles Rodríguez, B.; Durán-Zuazo, V.H.; Soriano Rodríguez, M.; García-Tejero, I.F.; Gálvez Ruiz, B.; Cuadros Tavira, S. Conservation Agriculture as a Sustainable System for Soil Health: A Review. Soil Syst. 2022, 6, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Maikhuri, R.K.; Rao, K.S. Soil quality and soil health: A review. Int. J. Ecol. Environ. Sci. 2012, 38, 19–37. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rojas, R.V.; Achouri, M.; Maroulis, J.; Caon, L. Healthy soils: A prerequisite for sustainable food security. Environ. Earth Sci. 2016, 75, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kitchenham, B.A.; Budgen, D.; Brereton, P. Evidence-Based Software Engineering and Systematic Reviews; CRC Press: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Volume 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Dyba, T.; Dingsoyr, T.; Hanssen, G.K. Applying systematic reviews to diverse study types: An experience report. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2007), Madrid, Spain, 20–21 September 2007; pp. 225–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cooper, H.M. Synthesizing Research: A Guide for Literature Reviews, 3rd ed.; Applied Social Research Methods Series, v. 2; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  34. Cooper, H.; Hedges, L. The Handbook of Research Synthesis; Russell Sage Foundation: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  35. Dybå, T.; Kampenes, V.B.; Sjøberg, D.I. A systematic review of statistical power in software engineering experiments. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2006, 48, 745–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Higgins, J.P.; Green, S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.6 [Updated September 2006]; The Cochrane Library: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006; Volume 4. [Google Scholar]
  37. Mulrow, C.D.; Cook, D. Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Health Care Decisions; ACP Press: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Petticrew, M.; Roberts, H. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  39. Popay, J.; Roberts, H.; Sowden, A.; Petticrew, M.; Arai, L.; Rodgers, M.; Britten, N.; Roen, K.; Duffy, S. Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. Prod. Esrc Methods Programme Version 2006, 1, b92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Higgins, J. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 [Updated March 2011]; The Cochrane Collaboration: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011; Available online: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org (accessed on 10 June 2022).
  41. Skobelev, P.; Tabachinskiy, A.; Simonova, E.; Lee, T.R.; Zhilyaev, A.; Laryukhin, V. Digital twin of rice as a decision-making service for precise farming, based on environmental datasets from the fields. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Information Technology and Nanotechnology (ITNT), Samara, Russia, 20–24 September 2021; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Dörr, J. Digital Farming in the Context of Digital Ecosystems. Atzheavy Duty Worldw. 2021, 14, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chukkapalli, S.S.L.; Aziz, S.B.; Alotaibi, N.; Mittal, S.; Gupta, M.; Abdelsalam, M. Ontology driven ai and access control systems for smart fisheries. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM workshop on Secure and Trustworthy Cyber-Physical Systems, Virtual Even, 28 April 2021; pp. 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Liu, Y.; Ma, X.; Shu, L.; Hancke, G.P.; Abu-Mahfouz, A.M. From Industry 4.0 to Agriculture 4.0: Current status, enabling technologies, and research challenges. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2020, 17, 4322–4334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Raj Kumar, R.; Sriram, K.; Surya Narayanan, I. Self Optimizing Drip Irrigation System Using Data Acquisition and Virtual Instrumentation to Enhance the Usage of Irrigation Water. In Cyber-Physical Systems and Digital Twins, Proceedings of the International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation, Banglore, India, 3–6 February 2019; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 489–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sung, Y.M.; Kim, T. Smart Farm Realization Based on Digital Twin. ICIC Express Lett. 2022, 13, 421–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Akroyd, J.; Harper, Z.; Soutar, D.; Farazi, F.; Bhave, A.; Mosbach, S.; Kraft, M. Universal digital twin: Land use. Data-Centric Eng. 2022, 3, e3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tabunshchyk, G.; Arras, P.; Henke, K.; Wuttke, H.D. Smart Innovative Engineering for Smart Agriculture Modernization. In Online Engineering and Society 4.0, Proceedings of the International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation, Hongkong, China, 24–26 February2021; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hurst, W.; Mendoza, F.R.; Tekinerdogan, B. Augmented Reality in Precision Farming: Concepts and Applications. Smart Cities 2021, 4, 1454–1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ng, A.K.; Mahkeswaran, R. Emerging and disruptive technologies for urban farming: A review and assessment. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 2003, 012008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lowe, T.; Moghadam, P.; Edwards, E.; Williams, J. Canopy density estimation in perennial horticulture crops using 3D spinning lidar SLAM. J. Field Robot. 2021, 38, 598–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tsolakis, N.; Bechtsis, D.; Vasileiadis, G.; Menexes, I.; Bochtis, D.D. Sustainability in the Digital Farming Era: A Cyber-Physical Analysis Approach for Drone Applications in Agriculture 4.0. In Information and Communication Technologies for Agriculture—Theme IV: Actions; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 29–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ghandar, A.; Ahmed, A.; Zulfiqar, S.; Hua, Z.; Hanai, M.; Theodoropoulos, G. A decision support system for urban agriculture using digital twin: A case study with aquaponics. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 35691–35708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Jans-Singh, M.; Leeming, K.; Choudhary, R.; Girolami, M. Digital twin of an urban-integrated hydroponic farm. Data-Centric Eng. 2020, 1, e20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Skobelev, P.; Mayorov, I.; Simonova, E.; Goryanin, O.; Zhilyaev, A.; Tabachinskiy, A.; Yalovenko, V. Development of models and methods for creating a digital twin of plant within the cyber-physical system for precision farming management. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1703, 012022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sreedevi, T.; Kumar, M.S. Digital Twin in Smart Farming: A categorical literature review and exploring possibilities in hydroponics. In Proceedings of the 2020 Advanced Computing and Communication Technologies for High Performance Applications (ACCTHPA), Cochin, India, 2–4 July 2020; pp. 120–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Delgado, J.A.; Short, N.M., Jr.; Roberts, D.P.; Vandenberg, B. Big data analysis for sustainable agriculture on a geospatial cloud framework. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2019, 3, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Machl, T.; Donaubauer, A.; Kolbe, T.H. Planning agricultural core road networks based on a digital twin of the cultivated landscape. J. Digit. Landsc. Archit. 2019, 4, 316–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Laryukhin, V.; Skobelev, P.; Lakhin, O.; Grachev, S.; Yalovenko, V.; Yalovenko, O. Towards developing a cyber-physical multi-agent system for managing precise farms with digital twins of plants. Cybern. Phys. 2019, 8, 257–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Angin, P.; Anisi, M.H.; Göksel, F.; Gürsoy, C.; Büyükgülcü, A. AgriLoRa: A digital twin framework for smart agriculture. J. Wirel. Mob. Netw. Ubiquitous Comput. Dependable Appl. 2020, 11, 77–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Jones, D.; Snider, C.; Nassehi, A.; Yon, J.; Hicks, B. Characterising the Digital Twin: A systematic literature review. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2020, 29, 36–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.