MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289397379 · doi:10.5539/enrr.v12n2p14

Physicochemical Analysis of Parameters Influencing Soil Loss for a Selected Location in North Central Nigeria Using Rainfall Simulator

2022· article· en· W4289397379 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Jiya Musa, Otuaro Ebierin Akpoebidimiyen, Pius Olusegun Olufemi Dada, Eze Peter Chukwu, Jamil dams-Suberu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Natural Resources Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface runoffLoamIntensity (physics)Environmental scienceAlkalinitySoil scienceHydrology (agriculture)Soil waterSoutheastern NigeriaChemistryGeologyEcologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing a simple and proper model that can accurately predict runoff generation for various locations is in strong demand. This study developed a simple model based on the interactive effects of rainfall intensity and soil physicochemical properties on runoff using a locally produced rainfall simulator. The drop velocity (DV) was calculated to be 8.101m/s and 2.443 m/s when operated at maximum and minimum intensity, respectively, and the performance test revealed the experimental coefficient of uniformity (CU) and rainfall intensity from the simulator to be 79.86 % at 31.79 mmhr-1 and 78.03 % at 16.08 mmhr-1 at maximum and minimum intensity respectively. Results showed that the soils were loamy sand, with clay having the lowest percentage between 3.55% - 4% and sand having the highest percentage between 78.4% - 80.1% on both plots. Runoff significantly correlated with pH(H20), nitrogen and rainfall intensity for vegetative plot (p < 0.001, R2 = 86.29%) while for bare plot, runoff significantly correlated with pH (KCl), Electrical Conductivity, Exchangeable Calcium, and rainfall intensity (p < 0.001, R2 = 92.39%). This result revealed that rainfall intensity and alkalinity are key factors influencing runoff in the study location.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Natural Resources ResearchSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207