Spatial Mapping of Soil Properties Using Geostatistical Methods in the Ghazvin Plains of Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geostatistical interpolation is widely used to map spatial variability in physical and chemical properties of soil, such as organic matter content, particle density; and pH. Geostatistical interpolation is a branch of applied science which predicts spatial concentrations at unknown locations at a study area by incorporating limited measured data, which is a major advantage over classical statistics. Although many studies applied geostatistical interpolation in agricultural land, there are still gaps in knowledge in selecting suitable models to map soil properties on a large geographical location. The objectives of this paper were to examine and to map the spatial distribution of the soil physico-chemical properties, including electric conductivity (EC), pH, sodium absorption ratio (SAR), organic matter (OM), percentage of sand, silt and clay, bulk density (ρb), saturate percentage (SP), and mean weight diameter (MWD), at 800 hectares of agro-industrial land at Sharifabad, Qazvin, Iran. The soil samples were collected in total 275 points in a regular grid (100 × 100m) over the study area. The exploratory statistical analysis was applied on the collected data for understanding the distribution of the dataset. The silt content, clay content and OM data showed normal frequency distribution, and the pH data show near to normal frequency distribution. The remaining soil properties data, including SAR, EC, SP, MWD, sand content and bulk density showed log-normal distribution, which was identified by the normality test of Kolmogorov-Smirnov with an error probability of 1%. The spatial characteristics of the dataset were assessed by semivariogram models in GS+ and GIS 10.3 software. Among the four different semivariogram models, namely linear, exponential, Gaussian and spherical, the best performing model was chosen following the highest R2 and lowest error values. The predictive geostatistical interpolation maps for each variable were drawn using ordinary kriging model.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".