MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977210159 · doi:10.4141/cjss08057

Using artificial neural network models to produce soil organic carbon content distribution maps across landscapes

2010· article· en· W1977210159 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Zilong Zhao, Qi Yang, Glenn Benoy, T. L. Chow, Zisheng Xing, H. W. Rees

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsSoil carbonSoil scienceEnvironmental scienceCorrelation coefficientDigital soil mappingDigital elevation modelScale (ratio)Remote sensingSoil mapSoil waterHydrology (agriculture)MathematicsGeologyStatisticsGeotechnical engineeringCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil organic carbon (SOC) content is an important soil quality indicator that plays an important role in regulating physical, chemical and biological properties of soil. Field assessment of SOC is time consuming and expensive. It is difficult to obtain high-resolution SOC distribution maps that are needed for landscape analysis of large areas. An artificial neural network (ANN) model was developed to predict SOC based on parameters derived from digital elevation model (DEM) together with soil properties extracted from widely available coarse resolution soil maps (1:1 000 000 scale). Field estimated SOC content data extracted from high-resolution soil maps (1:10 000 scale) in Black Brook Watershed in northwestern New Brunswick, Canada, were used to calibrate and validate the model. We found that vertical slope position (VSP) was the most important variable that determines distributions of SOC across the landscape. Other variables such as slope steepness, and potential solar radiation (PSR) also had significant influence on SOC distributions. The prediction of the selected two-input-node SOC model (VSP and coarse resolution soil map recorded SOC as inputs) had a correlation coefficient of 0.92 with measured values, and model predicted SOC values had 47.9% of the total points within ±0.5% of the measured values and 70.6% within ±1% of the measured values. The prediction od the selected four-input-node model (VSP, slope steepness, PSR and coarse resolution SOC values as inputs) had a correlation coefficient of 0.98 with measured values and model predicted SOC values had 75% of the total points within ±0.5% of the measured values and 87% within ±1% of the measured values. The prediction of the five-input-nodes model with soil drainage as additional input had a correlation coefficient of 0.99 with measured values, and model predicted SOC values had 87% of the total points within ±0.5% of the measured values and 98% of the total points within ±1% of the measured values. The calibrated SOC prediction model was used to produce a high-resolution SOC map for the Black Brook Watershed and the resulting SOC distribution map is considered to be realistic. Results indicated that DEM-derived hydrological parameters together with widely available coarse resolution soil map data could be used to produce high-resolution SOC maps with the ANN method.Key words: Soil organic carbon, artificial neural network model, high-resolution soil maps, digital elevation model, vertical slope position

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2010
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207