Comparing electromagnetic induction and ground penetrating radar techniques for estimating soil moisture content
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have demonstrated the capacity of electromagnetic geophysical methods for estimating soil moisture content. In this study, electromagnetic induction (EMI) and ground-penetrating radar (GPR) measurements were coincidently collected along a fixed survey line to evaluate temporal changes in apparent electrical conductivity and electromagnetic direct ground wave velocity, respectively; surveys were collected at three sites (i.e., sand, sandy loam and silt loam) during the course of a complete annual cycle of soil conditions. These two geophysical data sets correlated well during the course of the annual cycle at the silt loam site. Correlation between the two data sets was not as strong at the other two sites, with the sand site showing the lowest correlation values. Further, the geophysical data and gravimetric water content measurements obtained from the upper 0.5 metres indicate higher correlation estimates at the finer grained silt loam site relative to the sand and sandy loam sites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it