MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006230633 · doi:10.2136/sssaj2009.0216

Global Prospects Rooted in Soil Science

2010· article· en· W2006230633 on OpenAlex

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

VenueSoil Science Society of America Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquity (law)Environmental ethicsRelevance (law)HumanitySustainabilityPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsEcologyBiologyEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biosphere, our fragile and exquisite home, is changing abruptly and irrevocably, largely from human interference. Most or all of the coming stresses have links to the land, so finding hopeful outcomes depend on wide and deep understanding of soils. In this review, we pose eight urgent issues confronting humanity in coming decades: demands for food, water, nutrients, and energy; and challenges of climate change, biodiversity, “waste” reuse, and global equity. We then suggest some steps soil scientists might take to address these questions: a refocusing of research, a broadening of vision, a renewed enticement of emerging scientists, and more lucid telling of past successes and future prospects. The questions posed and responses posited are incomplete and not yet fully refined. But the conversations they elicit may help direct soil science toward greater relevance in preserving our fragile home on this changing planet.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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