Evaluating the Topographic Factors for Land Suitability Mapping of Specialty Crops in Southern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate change research identifies risks to agriculture that will impact agricultural land suitability. To mitigate these impacts, agricultural growing regions will need to adapt, diversify, or shift in location. Various machine learning algorithms have successfully modelled agricultural land suitability globally, predominantly using climate and soil features. Topography controls many of the environmental processes that impact agriculture, including soils, hydrology, and nutrient availability. This research evaluated the relationship between specialty crops and topography using land-surface parameters extracted from a 30 m DEM, soil features, and specialty crop presence/absence data derived from eight years of previous land classifications in southern Ontario, Canada. Using random forest, a model was developed for each specialty crop where feature permutation importance, Matthew’s correlation coefficient, and the area under the precision-recall curve was calculated. Elevation relative to watershed minimum and maximum, direct radiation on Day 172, and spherical standard deviation of normals were identified as the mean most important topographic features across all models and beet crops were found to have the highest association with topographic features. These results identify locations of agricultural expansion opportunities if climate becomes more favourable. The importance of topography in addition to climate and soils when identifying suitable areas for specialty crops is also highlighted.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".