MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393623433 · doi:10.61784/ajesv2n205

APPLICATION OF ENSEMBLE LEARNING IN ADAPTIVE SURFACE MODELING OF SOIL TOTAL POTASSIUM CONTENT IN COMPLEX LANDFORM AREAS

2024· article· en· W4393623433 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Journal of Earth Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandformContent (measure theory)PotassiumSoil scienceSurface (topology)Environmental scienceComputer scienceGeologyChemistryMathematicsGeomorphologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial distribution of soil properties is affected by complex geological environmental factors, and the spatial differentiation characteristics are very obvious. It is difficult to achieve high-precision simulation using a single global interpolation model to simulate soil properties. For the characteristics of spatial discontinuity, limited accuracy of global interpolation models and poor adaptability, this paper proposes an adaptive surface modeling method of soil properties (ASM-SP) supported by ensemble learning and integrating geoscientific environmental variables. Using 110 sample point data collected in 2013, regression kriging (RK), Bayesian kriging (BK), ordinary kriging interpolation (OK), inverse distance weighting (IDW), ASM- SP, the total potassium content of soil was interpolated in Qinghai Lake complex landform type area. This article uses the point-by-point cross validation (LOOCV) interpolation method to simulate accuracy. The results show that ASM-SP not only takes into account the nonlinear relationship between geological environmental variables and soil properties, but also integrates the adaptability advantages of multiple models. It is a new method to achieve high-precision simulation of total soil potassium content in complex landform areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207