ESTIMATION OF SOIL BULK DENSITY AND CARBON USING MULTI-SOURCE REMOTELY SENSED DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Bulk density and soil carbon models were fitted for soil samples collected during field campaigns in 2018 and 2019 for the Kapuskasing region of the District of Cochrane in Ontario, Canada. Prediction maps for bulk density and soil carbon were generated for the 0–15 cm depth mineral soil layer. The application of multi-source remotely sensed data as environmental covariates for model predictors was implemented. Environmental covariates were obtained from multispectral satellite imagery, LiDAR (light detection and ranging) retrievals and airborne geomagnetic surveys, as well from a digital elevation model (DEM) for topographic covariates. Two covariates derived from LiDAR, canopy height model (CHM) and gap fraction, were of high variable importance when fitting models for average bulk density; gap fraction had the highest to second highest variable importance for average bulk density when considered among a full set of 76, or reduced sets of 12 or 5 separate predictors respectively. Environmental covariates corresponding to vegetation cover, specifically reflectance from multispectral imagery or LiDAR data, had the highest variable importance when compared with other categories of soil formation factors. Random forest (RF) models were generated, with RF models based upon just 12 predictors obtaining reasonable results with coefficients of determinations (R2) greater than 0.7 for the standard derivation of bulk density, standard deviation of total carbon and average total carbon for the 0–15 cm depth layer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".