MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995249082 · doi:10.1007/s11104-010-0567-z

[no title]

2011· article· en· W1995249082 on OpenAlexaff
Bas van Wesemael, Olof Andrén, Carlos Eduardo Pellegrino Cerri, Mike Dodd, Jorge D. Etchevers, Esther Goidts, Peter Grace, Thomas Kätterer, B.G. McConkey, Stephen M. Ogle, Genxing Pan, Clemens Siebner

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenAgrar · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil carbonEnvironmental scienceSoil waterLand useCarbon sequestrationSampling (signal processing)AgricultureAgricultural landLand managementSoil testSoil scienceEcologyComputer scienceCarbon dioxide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As regional and continental carbon balances of terrestrial ecosystems become available, it becomes clear that the soils are the largest source of uncertainty. Repeated inventories of soil organic carbon (SOC) organized in soil monitoring networks (SMN) are being implemented in a number of countries. This paper reviews the concepts and design of SMNs in ten countries, and discusses the contribution of such networks to reducing the uncertainty of soil carbon balances. Some SMNs are designed to estimate country-specific land use or management effects on SOC stocks, while others collect soil carbon and ancillary data to provide a nationally consistent assessment of soil carbon condition across the major land-use/soil type combinations. The former use a single sampling campaign of paired sites, while for the latter both systematic (usually grid based) and stratified repeated sampling campaigns (5–10 years interval) are used with densities of one site per 10–1,040 km². For paired sites, multiple samples at each site are taken in order to allow statistical analysis, while for the single sites, composite samples are taken. In both cases, fixed depth increments together with samples for bulk density and stone content are recommended. Samples should be archived to allow for re-measurement purposes using updated techniques. Information on land management, and where possible, land use history should be systematically recorded for each site. A case study of the agricultural frontier in Brazil is presented in which land use effect factors are calculated in order to quantify the CO2 fluxes from national land use/management conversion matrices. Process-based SOC models can be run for the individual points of the SMN, provided detailed land management records are available. These studies are still rare, as most SMNs have been implemented recently or are in progress. Examples from the USA and Belgium show that uncertainties in SOC change range from 1.6–6.5 Mg C ha−1 for the prediction of SOC stock changes on individual sites to 11.72 Mg C ha−1 or 34% of the median SOC change for soil/land use/climate units. For national SOC monitoring, stratified sampling sites appears to be the most straightforward attribution of SOC values to units with similar soil/land use/climate conditions (i.e. a spatially implicit upscaling approach).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1030.060

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations67
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenAgrarSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207