MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068908980 · doi:10.2134/jeq2007.0572

Regionalizing Potential for Microbial Bypass Flow through New Zealand Soils

2008· article· en· W2068908980 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Malcolm McLeod, Jackie Aislabie, J. Ryburn, A. McGill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrokinetic Soil Remediation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFoundation for Research, Science and TechnologyMcGill UniversityMorris Animal Foundation
KeywordsSoil waterEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceGeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microbial breakthrough curves of 12 soils, generated by the application of dairy shed effluent followed by continuous artificial rainfall for one pore volume at 5 mm h(-1) onto large undisturbed soil cores, have been ranked as high, medium, or low potential for microbial bypass flow. The ranking is based on the position of the peak in the breakthrough curve. Knowledge of soil properties that affect microbial transport through soil gained from the microbial breakthrough curves was linked to soil classes, or to their accessory properties, of the New Zealand Soil Classification. Spatial depiction of the ratings has been achieved via the national 1:50,000 scale soil map. Soils with a drainage impediment or those with well developed soil structure have a high potential for microbial bypass flow, whereas soils from tephra and Recent Soils with less developed, porous, soil structure have a low potential for microbial bypass flow. The risk rankings should be considered as maxima because management may change some rankings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.251
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

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 designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicElectrokinetic Soil Remediation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207