MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400003066 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.190302

Evaluation of Soil Retention Capabilities Using RETC Application in Various Paddy Field Management Systems in Purwantoro District, Indonesia

2024· article· en· W4400003066 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mujiyo Mujiyo, Quentin Gede Lucky, Dwı Prıyo Arıyanto, Hery Widijanto

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Land Suitability Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultural engineeringPaddy fieldField (mathematics)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceMathematicsAgronomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prolonged dry seasons are one of the most influential impacts of global warming on the agricultural sector.Soil water retention is the ability of soil to hold water, which is presented in the form of pF curves (graphical representations of the relationship between soil water content and soil water potential).The soil's physical properties also influence the soil's water retention ability, which affects crop growth, crop yield, and land productivity.This study aims to measure soil water retention using the RETC program on various paddy field management systems: organic, semi-organic, and conventional.This research used a survey method in rice fields with different management systems and soil physical indicators approaches.The RETC program can be used to measure soil water retention in paddy fields accurately and efficiently.The results showed that the paddy field management system in Purwantoro Sub-district affects the soil's ability to retain water.The organic rice field management system has the highest available water content of 18%.The increase in soil water retention has a very significant positive correlation with soil organic matter content, where the organic matter content in the organic rice field management system is higher than the semi-organic and conventional management systems by 4.33%.Soil water retention capacity was determined by soil fraction content (0.522**), dust content (-0.438**), and effective depth (0.663**).The higher the clay content, the higher the available water content.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 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 venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicSoil and Land Suitability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207