MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048633793 · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2020.07.003

Approaches and concepts of modelling denitrification: increased process understanding using observational data can reduce uncertainties

2020· article· en· W3048633793 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen J. Del Grosso, Ward Smith, David Kraus, Raia Silvia Massad, Iris Vogeler, Kathrin Fuchs

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersKarlsruhe Institute of Technology
KeywordsDenitrificationBiogeochemical cycleEnvironmental scienceScope (computer science)Representation (politics)Vegetation (pathology)Process (computing)Computer scienceBiochemical engineeringEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringChemistryEnvironmental chemistryNitrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Denitrification is a key but poorly quantified component of the N cycle. Because it is difficult to measure the gaseous (NOx, N2O, N2) and soluble (NO3) components of denitrification with sufficient intensity, models of varying scope and complexity have been developed and applied to estimate how vegetation cover, land management and environmental factors such as soil type and weather interact to control these variables. In this paper we assess the strengths and limitations of different modeling approaches, highlight major uncertainties, and suggest how different observational methods and process-based understanding can be combined to better quantify N cycling. Representation of how biogeochemical (e.g. org. C., pH) and physical (e.g. soil structure) factors influence denitrification rates and product ratios combined with ensemble approaches may increase accuracy without requiring additional site level model inputs.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.352
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.001 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations58
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Environmental SustainabilitySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207