Rationalizing mottling and gleying in the characterization and classification of Canadian soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mottling and gleying remain important characteristics for the classification of soils in Canada. The development of criteria for the morphological description of these redoximorphic soil features, for soil horizon nomenclature, for the taxonomy of gleysolic and gleyed soils, as well as for soil drainage classification, began in the mid-1940s and continued for the next four decades. Despite advancements elsewhere, notably with Soil Taxonomy and the World Reference Base, there have been minimal refinements made in Canada, during the past quarter century. Various issues are identified, including the need for more succinct and clearer definitions, a revision of standards for the field characterization of redoximorphic features, as well as more consistency in the application of concepts across existing taxa and systems. A taxonomic framework to more effectively reflect redoximorphic features, such as a new “Redoximorphic Phase” is also discussed. Ultimately, it is recommended that a special committee to be established to conduct a thorough study and present recommendations.
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 | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".