Evaluation of pedotransfer functions predicting hydraulic properties of soils and deeper sediments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Eight pedotransfer functions (PTF) originally calibrated to soil data are used for evaluation of hydraulic properties of soils and deeper sediments. Only PTFs are considered which had shown good results in previous investigations. Two data sets were used for this purpose: a data set of measured pressure heads vs. water contents of 347 soil horizons (802 measured pairs) from Bavaria (Southern Germany) and a data set of 39 undisturbed samples of tertiary sediments from deeper ground (down to 100 m depth) in the molasse basin north of the Alps, containing 840 measured water contents vs. pressure head and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity. A statistical analysis of the PTFs shows that their performance is quite similar with respect to predicting soil water contents. Less satisfactory results were obtained when the PTFs were applied to prediction of water content of sediments from deeper ground. The predicted unsaturated hydraulic conductivities show about the same uncertainty as for soils in a previous study. Systematic deviations of predicted values indicate that an adaptation of the PTFs to the specific conditions of deeper ground should be possible in order to improve predictions.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".