MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059392214 · doi:10.4236/am.2014.55079

Comparison of Machine Learning Regression Methods to Simulate NO<sub>3</sub> Flux in Soil Solution under Potato Crops

2014· article· en· W2059392214 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

VenueApplied Mathematics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegression analysisRegressionFlux (metallurgy)AgronomyMathematicsChemistryStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrate (NO3) leaching is a major issue in sandy soils intensively cropped to potato. Modelling could test the effect of management practices on nitrate leaching, particularly with regard to optimal N application rates. The NO3 concentration in the soil solution is well known for its local heterogeneity and hence represents a major challenge for modeling. The objective of this 2-yearstudy was to evaluate machine learning regression methods to simulate seasonal NO3 concentration dynamics in suction lysimeters in potato plots receiving different N application rates. Four machine learning function approximation methods were compared: multiple linear regressions, multivariate adaptive regression splines, multiple-layer perceptrons, and least squares support vector machines. Input candidates were chosen for known relationships with NO3 concentration. The best regression model was obtained with a 6-inputs least squares support vector machine combining cumulative rainfall, cumulative temperature, day of the year, N fertilisation rate, soil texture, and depth.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.295 · 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