A new method for selecting sites for soil sampling, coupling global weighted principal component analysis and a cost-constrained conditioned Latin hypercube algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysing spatial patterns of soil properties in a landscape requires a sampling strategy that adequately covers soil toposequences. In this context, we developed a hybrid methodology that couples global weighted principal component analysis (GWPCA) and cost-constrained conditioned Latin hypercube algorithm (cLHC). This methodology produce an optimized sampling stratification by analysing the local variability of the soil property, and the influence of environmental factors. The methodology captures the maximum local variances in the global auxiliary dataset with the GWPCA, and optimizes the selection of representative sampling locations for sampling with the cLHC. The methodology also suppresses the subsampling of auxiliary datasets from areas that are less representative of the soil property of interest. Consequently, the method stratifies the geographical space of interest in order to adequately represent the soil property. We present results on the tested method ( R 2 = 0.90 and RMSE = 0.18 m ) from the Guinea savannah zone of Ghana. •It defines the local structure and accounts for localized spatial autocorrelation in explaining variability. •It suppresses the occurrence of model-selected sampling locations in areas that are less representative of the soil property of interest.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".