Sample Size Optimization for Digital Soil Mapping: An Empirical Example
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the evolving field of digital soil mapping (DSM), the determination of sample size remains a pivotal challenge, particularly for large-scale regional projects. We introduced the Jensen-Shannon Divergence (DJS), a novel tool recently applied to DSM, to determine optimal sample sizes for a 2790 km2 area in Ontario, Canada. Utilizing 1791 observations, we generated maps for cation exchange capacity (CEC), clay content, pH, and soil organic carbon (SOC). We then assessed sample sets ranging from 50 to 4000 through conditioned Latin hypercube sampling (cLHS), feature space coverage sampling (FSCS), and simple random sampling (SRS) to calibrate random forest models, analyzing performance via concordance correlation coefficient and root mean square error. Findings reveal DJS as a robust estimator for optimal sample sizes—865 for cLHS, 874 for FSCS, and 869 for SRS, with property-specific optimal sizes indicating the potential for enhanced DSM accuracy. This methodology facilitates a strategic approach to sample size determination, significantly improving the precision of large-scale soil mapping. Conclusively, our research validates the utility of DJS in DSM, offering a scalable solution. This advancement holds considerable promise for improving soil management and sustainability practices, underpinning the critical role of precise soil data in agricultural productivity and environmental conservation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".