MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025779500 · doi:10.4141/cjss07066

SimPLE.ca: Simulator of productivity loss due to erosion for Canada

2008· article· en· W2025779500 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
E. Bremer, K.J. Greer, Megan Black, L. Townley‐Smith, S. S. Malhi, R. C. Izaurralde, Francis J. Larney

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopsoilEnvironmental scienceErosionProductivitySoil lossSoil scienceAgricultural engineeringNutrientAgronomyCrop yieldWEPPCrop productivityHydrology (agriculture)Soil waterAgricultureCropSoil conservationGeologyEcologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robust and practical estimates of the impact of soil erosion on crop productivity are essential for developing and implementing appropriate solutions for soil erosion on agricultural land. The objective of this study was to develop a simple model which captured the most important relationships between topsoil erosion and productivity loss for major agricultural regions of Canada. The model was developed for spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and corn (Zea mays L.). Using annual time steps, maximum crop yields were reduced by soil erosion due to losses in available water-holding capacity, N-mineralization potential and available P. Using minimal input data, the model accounted for 56% of the variation in relative yields (fraction of non-eroded controls) determined in field studies using desurfacing or comparison plot methods. Key words: Available N and P, model, nutrients, productivity loss, simulator, soil erosion, soil properties, yield loss

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207