MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309605390 · doi:10.3390/rs14225803

Multi-Horizon Predictive Soil Mapping of Historical Soil Properties Using Remote Sensing Imagery

2022· article· en· W4309605390 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Preston Sorenson, Jeremy Kiss, Angela Bedard‐Haughn, Steven J. Shirtliffe

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSoil carbonDigital soil mappingEnvironmental scienceSoil mapSoil scienceSoil surveyCation-exchange capacityTerrainSoil horizonSoil testRandom forestRemote sensingSoil waterGeologyComputer scienceCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing demand for more detailed soil maps to support fine-scale land use planning, soil carbon management, and precision agriculture in Saskatchewan. Predictive soil mapping that incorporates a combination of environmental covariates provides a cost-effective tool for generating finer resolution soil maps. This study focused on mapping soil properties for multiple soil horizons in Saskatchewan using historical legacy soil data in combination with remote sensing band indices, bare soil composite imagery, climate data, and terrain attributes. Mapped soil properties included soil organic carbon content (SOC), total nitrogen, cation exchange capacity (CEC), electrical conductivity (EC), inorganic carbon (IOC), sand and clay content, and total profile soil organic carbon stocks. For each of these soil properties, a recursive feature elimination was undertaken to reduce the number of features in the overall model. This process involved iteratively removing features such that random forest out-of-bag error was minimized. Final random forest models were built for each property and evaluated using an independent test dataset. Overall, predictive models were successful for SOC (R2 = 0.71), total nitrogen (R2 = 0.65), CEC (R2 = 0.46), sand content (R2 = 0.44) and clay content (R2 = 0.55). The methods used in this study enable mapping of a greater geographic region of Saskatchewan compared to those previously established that relied solely on bare soil composite imagery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207