Variability of topsoil hydraulic conductivity along the hillslope transects delineated in four areas strongly affected by soil erosion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Soil hydraulic conductivities of topsoils were studied at 5 points of the hillslope transects delineated at 4 geomorphologically diverse areas, where the original soil types (Chernozem, Luvisol and two Cambisols) were due to erosion transformed into different soil unites. Hydraulic conductivities of saturated soils and for a pressure head of –2 cm were measured directly in the field using a Guelph permeameter ( K s,GP ) and mini disk tension infiltrometer ( K h=– 2 ,MDI ), and in the laboratory using a multistep outflow method ( K s,MSO , K h= – 2 ,MSO ). While K s,GP ≈ K s,MSO in the Chernozem and Cambisol (sandy loam) regions, and K s,GP < K s,MSO in the Luvisol and Cambisol (loam) regions. The K s values obtained using different methods showed different trends along the hillslope transects. The K h= – 2 values obtained using different methods showed similar trends along the transects in the Chernozem and Luvisol regions. These trends could be explained by the position within the transects (i.e., different stages of erosion/accumulation processes). No relationships were found between the K h=– 2 values in the Cambisol regions. The pressure head at an inflection point of the a soil-water retention curve was the main parameter, which appeared to associate (negative correlation) with K h=– 2 and K s,MSO in the Chernozem and Luvisol regions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".