Multifidelity-based Gaussian process for quasi-site-specific probabilistic prediction of soil properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional empirical equations for soil properties prediction tend to be site-specific, exhibiting poor reliability and accuracy. Meanwhile, alternative data-driven methods require large datasets for training. To address these issues, this study proposed a novel multifidelity residual neural-network-based Gaussian process (MR-NNGP) modelling framework. A soil property low-fidelity (LF) prediction model is first trained using abundant LF data collected from worldwide sites for generating preliminary estimation. A high-fidelity (HF) model is subsequently trained on sparse HF data from the specific site of interest for calibrating the LF model to make quasi-site-specific predictions. An infinitely wide NN-inspired NNGP is adopted as the baseline algorithm for training LF and HF models. The compression index of clays is selected as an example to examine the capability of the proposed MR-NNGP. The results indicate that the compression index of clays can be well captured by MR-NNGP, exhibiting superior accuracy and reliability compared with one-shot training without using MR modelling and other baseline algorithms such as GP. The MR-NNGP framework alleviates data dependency and improves model performance through hierarchical modelling on relatively simple correlations using a superior algorithm. Unified LF data and efficient hyper-parameter optimization indicate the flexibility for broader applications in various sites worldwide.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".