Recalcitrant C Source Mapping Utilizing Solely Terrain-Related Attributes and Data Mining Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agricultural practices affect arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) hyphae growth and glomalin production, which is a recalcitrant carbon (C) source in soil. Since the spatial distribution of glomalin is an interesting issue for agronomists in terms of carbon sequestration, digital maps are a cost-free and useful approach. For this study, a set of 120 soil samples was collected from an experimental area of 310 km2 from the Sarab region of Iran. Soil total glomalin (TG) and easily extractable glomalin (EEG) were determined via ELISA using the monoclonal antibody 32B11. Soil organic carbon (OC) was also measured. The ratios of TG/OC and EEG/OC as the glomalin–C quotes of OC were calculated. A total of 17 terrain-related attributes were also derived from the digital elevation model (DEM) and used as static environmental covariates in digital soil mapping (DSM) using three predictive models, including multiple linear regression (MLR), random forests (RF), and Cubist (CU). The major findings were as follows: (a) DSM facilitated the interpretation of recalcitrant C source variation; (b) RF outperformed MLR and CU as models in predicting and mapping the spatial distribution of glomalin using available covariates; (c) the best accuracy in predictions was for EEG, followed by EEG/OC, TG, and TG/OC.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".