MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167190733 · doi:10.2136/sssaj2006.0396

Estimating Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Using Genetic Programming

2007· article· en· W2167190733 on OpenAlexafffund
Kamban Parasuraman, Amin Elshorbagy, Bingcheng Si

Bibliographic record

VenueSoil Science Society of America Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPedotransfer functionHydraulic conductivityVadose zoneGenetic programmingSoil scienceComputer scienceSoil waterMathematicsEnvironmental scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saturated hydraulic conductivity ( K s ) is one of the key parameters in modeling solute and water movement in the vadose zone. Field and laboratory measurement of K s is time consuming, and hence is not practical for characterizing the large spatial and temporal variability of K s As an alternative to direct measurements, pedotransfer functions (PTFs), which estimate K s from readily available soil data, are being widely adopted. This study explores the utility of a promising data‐driven method, namely, genetic programming (GP), to develop PTFs for estimating K s from sand, silt, and clay contents and bulk density ( D b ). A data set from the Unsaturated Soil Hydraulic Database (UNSODA) was considered in this study. The performance of the GP models were compared with the neural networks (NNs) model, as it is the most widely adopted method for developing PTFs. The uncertainty of the PTFs was evaluated by combining the GP and the NN models, using the nonparametric bootstrap method. Results from the study indicate that GP appears to be a promising tool for developing PTFs for estimating K s The better performance of the GP model may be attributed to the ability of GP to optimize both the model structure and its parameters in unison. For the PTFs developed using GP, the uncertainty due to model structure is shown to be more than the uncertainty due to model parameters. Moreover, the results indicate that it is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve better prediction and less uncertainty simultaneously.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations71
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoil Science Society of America JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207