A Random Forest in the Great Lakes: Stream Nutrient Concentrations Across the Transboundary Great Lakes Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Excess nutrient inputs from agricultural and urban sources have accelerated eutrophication and increased the incidence of algal blooms in the Great Lakes Basin (GLB). Lake basin management to address these threats relies on understanding the key drivers of pollution. Here, we use a random forest machine learning model to leverage information from 202 monitored streams in the GLB to predict seasonal and annual flow‐weighted concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus, as well as nutrient ratios across the GLB. Land use (agricultural and urban land) and land management (tile drainage and wetland density) emerge as the two most important predictors for dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN; NO 3 − + NO 2 − ) and soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP; PO 4 3 ), while soil type and wetland density are more important for particulate P (PP). Partial dependence plots demonstrate increasing nutrient concentrations with increasing tile density and decreasing wetland density. In addition, increasing tile and livestock densities and decreasing forest cover correspond to higher SRP:Total Phosphorus (TP) ratios. Seasonally, the highest proportions of SRP occur in summer and fall. Higher livestock densities are also correlated with increasing N:P (DIN:TP) ratios. Livestock operations can contribute to the buildup of soil nutrients from excess manure application, while increasing subsurface drainage can provide transport pathways for dissolved nutrients. Given that both SRP:TP and the N:P ratios are strong predictors of harmful algal blooms, our study highlights the importance of livestock management, drainage management, and wetland restoration in efforts to address eutrophication in intensively managed landscapes.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".