MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1596025911 · doi:10.2134/agronmonogr46.c6

Assessing Potential Environmental Impacts of Soil Phosphorus by Soil Testing

2005· book-chapter· en· W1596025911 on OpenAlex
Rory O. Maguire, W.J. Chardon, R. R. Simard

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy monograph/Agronomy · 2005
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental sciencePhosphorusEnvironmental chemistrySoil scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sufficient supply of phosphorus (P) to agricultural crops is essential to optimize production and farm income. This chapter focuses on the concentration of P in the soil measured as soil test P (STP). Once the environmental threshold STP is reached, stricter management of P applications comes into effect. STP is not the same as total P, and various soil testing methods have been developed to measure or estimate the fraction of total P that is important for either plant availability, potential environmental impact or both. The chapter discusses the most appropriate soil testing methods and interpretations. As soil sampling recommendations were developed for assessing crop requirements, it is possible that separate soil sampling strategies may be required for environmental soil testing. Several researchers showed that nonconventional soil tests, which are often thought of as environmental soil tests, are only slightly better than conventional soil tests for predicting P losses through surface and subsurface pathways.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it