Enhancing soil organic carbon estimation accuracy: Integrating spatial vegetation dynamics and temporal analysis with Sentinel 2 imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article introduces an improved method for estimating Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) using Sentinel 2 images, with a specific emphasis on the Dakshina Kannada area in India. By examining 364 soil samples, SOC estimation models were constructed using Random forests (RF) and Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR), focusing on the impact of nearby vegetation pixels. The approach consisted of classifying soil samples by the presence of plant pixels at distances of 0, 10, and 20 m, and evaluating the influence of dry vegetation by the use of the Normalised Burn Ratio 2 (NBR2). The findings demonstrated a significant improvement in the precision of the model (by up to 20 %) when vegetation pixels within a 20-meter radius of the sample locations were omitted. The research also included a temporal analysis utilizing Sentinel-2 images from April 2017 to May 2023. This analysis showed strong relationships between the amount of exposed soil and the accuracy of predicting soil organic carbon (SOC) levels. These results emphasize the need to take into account both the spatial dynamics of vegetation and the temporal variations in bare soil covering to get an accurate estimate of soil organic carbon (SOC). This study improves the accuracy and dependability of SOC evaluations by including geographical and temporal aspects, providing useful insights for agricultural and ecological applications. • Enhanced SOC Estimation: Improved SOC estimation using Sentinel 2 imagery in Dakshina Kannada, India. • Integration of Spatial and Temporal Analysis: Combined spatial vegetation dynamics and temporal analysis for better SOC prediction. • Vegetation Influence: Improved SOC models by excluding vegetation pixels within a 20-meter radius. • Temporal Analysis Insights: Temporal analysis from April 2017 to May 2023 showed strong correlations between exposed soil and SOC accuracy. • Model Performance: RF outperformed PLSR in SOC estimation models in specific scenarios.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".