Soil <scp>M</scp> oisture <scp>D</scp> eficit as a predictor of the trend in soil water status of grass fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nutrient loss from agricultural land following organic fertilizer spreading can lead to eutrophication and poor water quality. The risk of pollution is partly related to the soil water status during and after spreading. In response to these issues, a decision support system ( DSS ) for nutrient management has been developed to predict when soil and weather conditions are suitable for slurry spreading. At the core of the DSS , the Hybrid Soil Moisture Deficit ( HSMD ) model estimates soil water status relative to field capacity ( FC ) for three soil classes (well, moderately and poorly drained) and has potential to predict the occurrence of a transport vector when the soil is wetter than FC . Three years of field observation of volumetric water content was used to validate HSMD model predictions of water status and to ensure correct use and interpretation of the drainage classes. Point HSMD model predictions were validated with respect to the temporal and spatial variations in volumetric water content and soil strength properties. It was found that the HSMD model predictions were well related to topsoil water content through time, but a new class intermediate between poor and moderate, perhaps ‘imperfectly drained’, was needed. With correct allocations of a field into a drainage class, the HSMD model predictions reflect field scale trends in water status and therefore the model is suitable for use at the core of a DSS .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".