A Convolutional Neural Network Model for Soil Temperature Prediction under Ordinary and Hot Weather Conditions: Comparison with a Multilayer Perceptron Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil temperature is a critical parameter in soil science, agriculture, meteorology, hydrology, and water resources engineering, and its accurate and cost-effective determination and prediction are very important. Machine learning models are widely employed for surface, near-surface, and subsurface soil temperature predictions. The present study employed a properly designed one-dimensional convolutional neural network model to predict the hourly soil temperature at a subsurface depth of 0–7 cm. The annual input dataset for this model included eight hourly climatic features. The performance of this model was assessed using a wide range of evaluation metrics and compared to that of a multilayer perceptron model. A detailed sensitivity analysis was conducted on each feature to determine its importance in predicting the soil temperature. This analysis showed that air temperature had the greatest impact and surface thermal radiation had the least impact on soil temperature prediction. It was concluded that the one-dimensional convolutional model performed better than the multilayer perceptron model in predicting the soil temperature under both normal and hot weather conditions. The findings of this study demonstrated the capability of the model to predict the daily maximum soil temperature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".