MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393759851 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3678850

Global land use/land cover and soils relations from 850 to 2015 (LUSoils v.1)

2020· dataset· en· W4393759851 on OpenAlexaff
Pei-Ling Wang, Johannes J. Feddema

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCover (algebra)Soil waterLand coverLand useEnvironmental scienceGeographyForestrySoil sciencePhysical geographyEcologyBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset links human land use and land cover types from the Land-Use Harmonization (LUH2) dataset (Lawrence et al., 2016) to four hydrologic soil groups from 850 to 2015 derived from the SoilGrids250m soils dataset (Hengl et al., 2017). These groups represent sandy soils (hydrologic group A) consisting of texture classes sand, sandy loam, and loamy sand; silty soils (hydrologic group B) consisting of loam, silty-loam, and silt; a mixed sand-silt-clay soils (hydrologic group C); and clayey soils (hydrologic group D) represented by clay, sandy-clay, clay-loam, silty-clay, and silt-clay-loam texture classes from the SoilGrids250m dataset. This dataset makes it possible to better link LULCs to soil types typically used for these activities potentially improving the simulation of water, energy and biogeochemical processes in Earth System Models. Additionally, it lays the foundation for simulating LULC impacts on soils that have different vulnerabilities and responses to human uses of soils.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.027

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207