X-ray computed microtomography in the evaluation of the porous system of soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Analysis of shapes, sizes, continuity, orientation and irregularities of pores can help in the study of soil structural modifications induced by soil management. The study of the inter- and intra-aggregate porous space of urban and rural soils by tomographic images is the objective of this work. A morphometric characterization of the pores was carried out with the analysis of distribution of their size, shape and inclination in these two types of soil. The urban soil showed smaller percentage of inter-aggregate voids and more intra-aggregate voids compared with the rural soil. The cumulative distribution of void volumes showed little pore diversity in the urban soil and great presence of large pores (48%), almost twice the voids with same size in the rural soil. The urban soil, compared to rural soil, also had a higher percentage of flattened pores (29.41%) and a smaller percentage of rounded voids (6.97%), as well as a greater percentage of horizontal voids (44.49%). Hence, the urban soil proved to be more compacted than the rural soil.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".