An Open-Source, Durable, and Low-Cost Alternative to Commercially Available Soil Temperature Data Loggers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil temperatures play an important role in determining the distribution and function of organisms. However, soil temperature is decoupled from air temperature and varies widely in space. Characterizing and predicting soil temperature requires large and expensive networks of data loggers. We developed an open-source soil temperature data logger and created online resources to ensure our design was accessible. We tested data loggers constructed by students, with little prior electronics experience, in the lab, and in the field in Alaska. The do-it-yourself (DIY) data logger was comparably accurate to a commercial system with a mean absolute error of 2% from -20-0 °C and 1% from 0-20 °C. They captured accurate soil temperature data and performed reliably in the field with less than 10% failing in the first year of deployment. The DIY loggers were ~1.7-7 times less expensive than commercial systems. This work has the potential to increase the spatial resolution of soil temperature monitoring and serve as a powerful educational tool. The DIY soil temperature data logger will reduce data collection costs and improve our understanding of species distributions and ecological processes. It also provides an educational resource to enhance STEM, accessibility, inclusivity, and engagement.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.015 |
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".