A framework for recalibrating pedotransfer functions using nonlinear least squares and estimating uncertainty using quantile regression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pedotransfer functions (PTFs) have been developed for many regions to estimate values missing from soil profile databases. However, globally there are many areas without existing PTFs, and it is not advisable to use PTFs outside their domain of development due to poor performance. Further, developed PTFs often lack accompanying uncertainty estimations. To address these issues, a framework is proposed where existing equation-based PTFs are recalibrated using a nonlinear least squares (NLS) approach and validated on two regions of Canada; this process is coupled with the use of quantile regression (QR) to generate uncertainty estimates. Many PTFs have been developed to predict soil bulk density, so this variable is used as a case study to evaluate the outcome of recalibration. New coefficients are generated for existing soil bulk density PTFs, and the performance of these PTFs is validated using three case study datasets, one from the Ottawa region of Ontario and two from the province of British Columbia, Canada. The improvement of the performance of the recalibrated PTFs is evaluated using root mean square error (RMSE) and the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). Uncertainty estimates produced using QR are communicated through the mean prediction interval (MPI) and prediction interval coverage probability (PICP) graphs. This framework produces dataset-specific PTFs with improved accuracy and minimized uncertainty, and the method can be applied to other regional datasets to improve the estimations of existing PTF model forms. The methods are most successful with large datasets and PTFs with fewer variables and minimal transformations; further, PTFs with organic carbon (OC) as one of or the sole input variable resulted in the highest accuracy.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".