MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503892574 · doi:10.5539/jas.v8n9p152

Soil Mapping in Chongwe, Zambia by Digital Analysis of Landsat Data

2016· article· en· W2503892574 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chizumba Shepande, Marvin E. Bauer, J. Carter Bell, Victor Shitumbanuma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic MapperRemote sensingSoil mapDigital soil mappingSoil waterEnvironmental scienceDry seasonVegetation (pathology)Satellite imageryThematic mapGeographyCartographySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Designing a methodology for mapping and studying soils in a quick and inexpensive way is critical especially in developing countries like Zambia, which lack detailed soil surveys. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the potential of Landsat 7 ETM+ data (Enhanced Thematic Mapper plus) in mapping soils in Chongwe, a semi-arid region in Zambia. In addition, the study attempted to establish how accurate spectral soil maps produced by digital analysis of Landsat data can be and how such maps compared with field observation data. Also, in situations where there was poor agreement between Landsat data and field observation data, possible causes of such discrepancies where determined.</p><p>A soil inventory of the Chongwe region of Zambia was prepared using computer-aided digital analysis of two Landsat 7 ETM+ satellite images acquired in the dry and rainy seasons to investigate the hypothesis that there is a relationship between Landsat spectral reflectance and certain soil types and that this relationship can be used to map soils with reasonable accuracy.</p><p>The study revealed that digital analysis of Landsat 7 ETM images has the capacity to map and delineate soil patterns with reasonable accuracy, especially when acquired during the dry season when there are long periods of cloud free skies, low soil moisture and minimal vegetation cover. The overall agreement between the Landsat classification and reference data was 72%, indicating a definite relationship between Landsat imagery and soil types.</p><p>In terms of soilscape boundary delineation, the Landsat derived map was had a higher level of agreement with field observations than the conventional soil map. In addition, the study showed that overall, upland areas have a better agreement with Landsat spectral data compared to lowland areas, probably due to the diverse origin of sediments and low spatial extent of most landforms in lowland areas.</p>

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207