Environmental Indicator Principium with Case References to Agricultural Soil, Water, and Air Quality and Model‐Derived Indicators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental indicators are powerful tools for tracking environmental changes, measuring environmental performance, and informing policymakers. Many diverse environmental indicators, including agricultural environmental indicators, are currently in use or being developed. This special collection of technical papers expands on the peer-reviewed literature on environmental indicators and their application to important current issues in the following areas: (i) model-derived indicators to indicate phosphorus losses from arable land to surface runoff and subsurface drainage, (ii) glutathione-ascorbate cycle-related antioxidants as early-warning bioindicators of polybrominated diphenyl ether toxicity in mangroves, and (iii) assessing the effectiveness of using organic matrix biobeds to limit herbicide dissipation from agricultural fields, thereby controlling on-farm point-source pollution. This introductory review also provides an overview of environmental indicators, mainly for agriculture, with examples related to the quality of the agricultural soil-water-air continuum and the application of model-derived indicators. Current knowledge gaps and future lines of investigation are also discussed. It appears that environmental indicators, particularly those for agriculture, work efficiently at the field, catchment, and local scales and serve as valuable metrics of system functioning and response; however, these indicators need to be refined or further developed to comprehensively meet community expectations in terms of providing a consistent picture of relevant issues and/or allowing comparisons to be made nationally or internationally.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".