Brunisolic soils of Canada: Genesis, distribution, and classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smith, C. A. S., Webb, K. T., Kenney, E., Anderson, A. and Kroetsch, D. 2011. Brunisolic soils of Canada: Genesis, distribution, and classification. Can. J. Soil Sci. 91: 695–717. Brunisols are considered as moderately developed soils formed under forest cover. They have a wide range of physical and chemical properties and no single dominant pedogenic process drives the development of these soils. Brunisols are some of the more common soils in Canada, occupying over 1.2 million km 2 of land, roughly equivalent to the area of Podzolic soils, and about half the area of the most common soil order in Canada, the Cryosols. Brunisols occur mainly within the boreal forest regions, but extend across the country with the exception of the Arctic and prairie regions. Within the zone of discontinuous permafrost they co-exist on landscapes with Cryosols. In humid regions of both eastern and western Canada they form a continuum of soil development with Podzolic soils. Within subhumid to semi-arid regions they often co-exist with Luvisolic soils, occurring on parent materials too coarse to enable Luvisolic soil formation. Brunisols equate closely to the Cambisol reference group in the World Reference Base taxonomic system and to several suborders of the Inceptisol order in Soil Taxonomy. Both Melanic and Sombric Brunisols are important agricultural soils in British Columbia, Ontario and the Maritime provinces. Eutric and Dystric Brunisols support commercial forest stands throughout the boreal forest and western cordillera of Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".