Statistical evaluation of testing conditions on the saturated hydraulic conductivity of Brazilian lateritic soils using artificial intelligence approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The saturated hydraulic conductivity, k sat , is a crucial variable to describe the hydromechanical behavior of soils. The value of k sat of lateritic soils that are typically found in tropical regions is highly affected by the soil’s structure, void ratio, and fine particle aggregation. As a result, the determination of k sat in the field or in the laboratory is complex and involves greater variability, depending on the type of test and on the spatial location of sampling. This paper presents a study of k sat values of lateritic soils, analyzing them using Statistic, Multilayer Perceptron Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) and Decision Trees (CHAID). This study aims to support decision-making regarding the type of test and depth chosen for sampling in laterite soils and understanding the factors influencing the permeability of such soils. An extensive literature review on the k sat values of lateritic soils was performed, providing data for the establishment of a database comprise of 722 registries. According to agronomic and geotechnical soil classifications, the Brazilian lateritic soils presents a “moderate” hydraulic conductivity. A significant variation of permeability values along the depth was identified, particularly for depths between 0.1 and 0.2 m. Regarding the importance of testing variables, the ANN indicated a high dependency on the type of test. The decision tree divided field test and laboratory test automatically, inferring the relevance of the type of test to the determination of k sat .
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".