MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805430624 · doi:10.2478/bgeo-2018-0002

Humusica: Soil biodiversity and global change

2018· article· en· W2805430624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Augusto Zanella, Judith Ascher‐Jenull, Jean‐François Ponge, Cristian Bolzonella, Damien Banas, Maria De Nobili, Silvia Fusaro, Luca Sella, Raffaello Giannini

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Geography Physical Geography Series · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumusBiodiversityBiomass (ecology)Process (computing)EcologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceEarth scienceEnvironmental resource managementSoil scienceComputer scienceSoil waterGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Born in Trento (Italy, 2003) for the purpose of standardising vocabulary and units of humus form classification, after publishing a first synthetic classification e-book (Zanella et al. 2011) they do not cover all site conditions in the European area. Although having basic concepts and general lines, the European (and North American, Canadian, the Humus group decided to use its classification for handling global change (Zanella and Ascher-Jenull 2018). The process is detailed in many scientific articles published in three Special Issues (Humusica 1, 2 and 3) of the journal Applied Soil Ecology. Conceptually, the whole of Humusica answers three crucial questions: A) What is soil? Soil is a biological ecosystem. It recycles dead structures and implements mineral material, furnishing more or less re-elaborated organic, mineral and organic-mineral elements to support living organisms. Article chapters: 1. Essential vocabulary; 2. Soil covers all the Earth’s surfaces (soil as the seat of processes of organic matter storage and recycling); 3. Soil may be involved in the process of natural evolution (through organisms’ process of recycling biomass after death). B) If soil has a biogenic essence, how should it be classified to serve such managerial purposes as landscape exploitation or protection? A useful classification of soil should consider and propose useful references to biologically discriminate soil features. Article chapters: 4. Soil corresponds to a biogenic structure; 5. TerrHum, an App for classifying forest humipedons worldwide (a first attempt to use a smartphone as a field manual for humus form classification). C) How can this soil classification be used for handling the current global change? Using the collected knowledge about the biodiversity and functioning of natural (or semi-natural) soil for reconstructing the lost biodiversity/functioning of heavily exploited or degraded soils. Article chapters: 6. Agricultural soils correspond to simplified natural soils (comparison between natural and agricultural soils); 7. Organic waste and agricultural soils; 8. Is traditional agriculture economically sustainable? Comparing past traditional farm practices (in 1947) and contemporary intensive farm practices in the Venice province of Italy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.193 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Geography Physical Geography SeriesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207