Estimation of total erosion in cultivated Black soils in northeast China from vertical profiles of soil organic carbon
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
Summary It is difficult to estimate soil thickness eroded from annual erosion rates in cultivated Black soils in northeast China because of the uncertainty of the time when the soil was first cultivated for agricultural crops. Assuming soil organic carbon (SOC) profile curves for cultivated sites are the same as virgin sites before cultivation, it may be possible to estimate the total thickness of surface soils lost by erosion by vertical movement of plotted SOC profiles until those for the virgin and cultivated soils are superimposed. We collected pairs of soil samples (0–1 m) with one sample in each pair from a virgin site and the other from a nearby cultivated site in Heilongjiang province, northeast China. In undulating areas where soil erosion was moderate, the shapes of SOC distribution curves below 40 cm depth were nearly identical for both cultivated and virgin soils, but were offset vertically. This offset was attributed to the loss of surface soil by erosion in the cultivated land. By moving the distribution curve of SOC in cultivated soil downwards by 12.7 cm, we found nearly coincident curves below 45 cm for the virgin and cultivated soils. This thickness (12.7 cm) was believed to be the depth of soils that had been eroded since the onset of cultivation in Black soils in northeast China. We concluded that the amount of surface soil lost by erosion could be estimated from comparison of the vertical distribution of SOC in cultivated and virgin soils.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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