MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110004483 · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/202019502024

Evaluation of prediction models applied to the soil-water characteristic curve of ideal materials

2020· article· en· W3110004483 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Dutra Alves, Gilson de Farias Neves Gitirana, Sai K. Vanapalli

Bibliographic record

VenueE3S Web of Conferences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizationIdealizationSoil waterIdeal (ethics)MathematicsComputer scienceBiological systemEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of theoretical and semi-empirical models to study capillary mechanisms and predict the soil-water characteristic curve (SWCC) generally requires the idealization of pore space and pore water, considering simplifying hypotheses. The study of ideal materials comprised of particles with controlled shape and size allows the evaluation of such simplifying hypotheses and the subsequent generalization to actual soils. In this paper, four theoretical and semi-empirical models for the prediction of the SWCC are applied to the prediction of artificial materials comprised of spherical particles. Nineteen grain-size distribution curves, with varying coefficients of uniformity are considered. The dataset is comprised of materials previously published and additional tests carried out by the authors, under highly controlled conditions. The analyses allowed the evaluation of the effect of grain-size distribution curve and shape of the particles. The limitations and advantages of each prediction model was investigated, and a detailed comparison is presented, guiding future implementations of improved models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE3S Web of ConferencesSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207