MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306181366 · doi:10.1139/cjss-2022-0031

Mapping the maximum peat thickness of cultivated organic soils in the southwest plain of Montreal

2022· article· en· W4306181366 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Raphaël Deragon, Daniel D. Saurette, Brandon Heung, Jean Caron

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsDalhousie UniversityUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPeatSoil waterGeospatial analysisDigital soil mappingSoil scienceEnvironmental scienceSoil mapHydrology (agriculture)GeologyRemote sensingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large organic deposits in the southwestern plain of Montreal have been converted to agricultural land for vegetable production. In addition to the variable depth of the organic deposits, these soils commonly have an impermeable coprogenous layer between the peat and the underlying mineral substratum. Estimations of the depth and thickness of these materials are critical for soil management. Therefore, five drained and cultivated peatlands were studied to estimate their maximum peat thickness (MPT)—a potential key soil property that can help identify management zones for their conservation. MPT can be defined as the depth to the mineral layer (DML) minus the coprogenous layer thickness (CLT). The objective of this study was to estimate DML, CLT, and MPT at a regional scale using environmental covariates derived from remote sensing. Three machine-learning models (Cubist, Random Forest, and k-Nearest Neighbor) were compared to produce maps of DML and CLT, which were combined to generate MPT at a spatial resolution of 10 m. The Cubist model performed the best for predicting both features of interest, yielding Lin’s concordance correlation coefficients of 0.43 and 0.07 for DML and CLT, respectively, using a spatial cross-validation procedure. Interpretation of the drivers of CLT was limited by the poor predictive power of the final model. More precise data on MPT are needed to support soil conservation practices, and more CLT field observations are required to obtain a higher prediction accuracy. Nonetheless, digital soil mapping using open-access geospatial data shows promise for understanding and managing cultivated peatlands.

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)0.003
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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207