The Heat Pulse Method for Soil Physical Measurements: A Bibliometric Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat pulse method is a transient method that estimates soil thermal properties by characterizing the radial transport of short-duration line-source heat applied to soils. It has been widely used to measure a wide range of soil physical properties including soil thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity, heat capacity, water content, ice content, bulk density, water flux and evaporation in laboratory and field environments. Previous studies generally focus on the scientific aspects of heat pulse method based on selected publications, and there is a lack of study investigating the heat pulse publication as a whole. The objective of this study was to give an overall view of the use of heat pulse method for soil physical measurements from the bibliometric perspectives. The analyses were based on the Web of Science Core Collection data between 1992 and 2019 using HistCite Pro and VOSviewer. The results showed an increasing trend in the volume of publications on this field and Dr. Robert Horton was the most productive researcher coauthoring papers on the heat pulse method. The co-authorship analysis revealed that researchers from soil science are closely collaborated, but this is not true for researchers in other fields. There is a lack of new young scientists committing to this field while the older generation of researchers are retiring. The United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Servics (USDA-ARS), the China Agriculture University and the Chinese Academy of Science were the top three organizations applying the heat pulse method, while the USA, China and Canada were the top three countries. The Soil Science Society of America Journal, Water Resources Research and Agricultural and Forestry Meteorology were the most widely used journals. The con-occurrence and citation analysis could be used to map the development of the field and identify the most influential publications. The study showed that the bibliometric analysis is a useful tool to visualize research status as well as to provide the general information of novices and experts alike on the heat pulse method for soil physical measurements.
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 | 0.019 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.199 | 0.248 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".