MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A COMPARISON OF MACHINE LEARNING MODELS FOR SOIL SALINITY ESTIMATION USING MULTI-SPECTRAL EARTH OBSERVATION DATA

2021· article· en· W3177036350 on OpenAlexaff
Arastou Zarei, Mahdi Hasanlou, Masoud Mahdianpari

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSoil salinitySalinitySoil scienceDryland salinityAridMean squared errorEarth observationRemote sensingArable landHydrology (agriculture)Soil waterSatelliteSoil fertilityGeologyMathematicsStatisticsGeographyEngineeringSoil biodiversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Soil salinity, a significant environmental indicator, is considered one of the leading causes of land degradation, especially in arid and semi-arid regions. In many cases, this major threat leads to loss of arable land, reduces crop productivity, groundwater resources loss, increases economic costs for soil management, and ultimately increases the probability of soil erosion. Monitoring soil salinity distribution and degree of salinity and mapping the electrical conductivity (EC) using remote sensing techniques are crucial for land use management. Salt-effected soil is a predominant phenomenon in the Eshtehard Salt Lake located in Alborz, Iran. In this study, the potential of Sentinel-2 imagery was investigated for mapping and monitoring soil salinity. According to the satellite's pass, different salt properties were measured for 197 soil samples in the field data study. Therefore several spectral features, such as satellite band reflectance, salinity indices, and vegetation indices, were extracted from Sentinel-2 imagery. To build an optimum machine learning regression model for soil salinity estimation, three different regression models, including Gradient Boost Machine (GBM), Extreme Gradient Boost (XGBoost), and Random Forest (RF), were used. The XGBoostmethod outperformed GBM and RF with the coefficient of determination (R2) more than 76%, Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) about 0.84 dS m−1, and Normalized Root Mean Square Error (NRMSE) about 0.33 dS m−1. The results demonstrated that the integration of remote sensing data, field data, and using an appropriate machine learning model could provide high-precision salinity maps to monitor soil salinity as an environmental problem.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.253
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.129 · 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 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

Citations44
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207