Preliminary investigations on the variation of humus forms using two different vegetation-related approaches in mountain sites of Lombardy (Italy)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the investigation for PACSI Project (First approximation of Italian Soil Map 1:250000 ERSAF- Agriculture and Forest Development Society of Lombardy Region) a study has been done to recognize the humus forms distribution in the mountain territory of Lombardy. The humus forms have been classified using two different approaches: the French one (Brethes et al. 1995, AFES-INRA 1998) and the Canadian one (Klinka et al. 1981, Green et al. 1993). In 8 representative soilscapes 28 humus forms surveys were carried out to correlate humus to the type of vegetation. Has been developed general proposal on distribution and variability of humus forms in explored mountains and hillys of the Lombardy areas in relation to environmental factors. This approach allowed us to single out, in a preliminary way, the characterization of humus forms on some sites of the mountain land of Lombardy. The humus forms shows more variability on the hilly sites (350-600 m a.s.l.), with no dominant form. The Mulls forms, Vermimull and Rhizomull (Green et al. 1993) are more present in open enviorments on mountain and premountain landscapes (grass/graze lands). The Rhizomull are also present in the subalpine belt (1200-1900 m a.s.l.) and on grassland in the mountain belt (1200-1900 m a.s.l.). Mormoders forms (Green et al. 1993) appear from 500 to 950 m a.s.l. (in the premountain belt). At high altitudes (mountain belt) in forest envoiroments or where there was a forest onetime, the Mors while Humimors (Green et al. 1993) are predominant.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".