MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prediction of thermal conductivity of frozen soils from basic soil properties using ensemble learning methods

2024· article· en· W4403092418 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoderma · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship CouncilUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsSoil waterEnsemble learningSoil scienceThermal conductivityEnvironmental scienceGeologyMineralogyMaterials scienceMachine learningComputer scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Two ensemble learning methods-based models are proposed to evaluate the thermal conductivity of frozen soils using easily measured parameters. • The temperature range has a more significant impact on the unfrozen water content than on the thermal conductivity of frozen soils. • The model based on the boosting algorithm performs better on the dataset than the model based on the bagging algorithm. Thermal conductivity is one of the important properties required for understanding the frozen soils behavior. There are several models available in the literature for the prediction of thermal conductivity of frozen soils based on the proportions of unfrozen water, ice, gas, and soil particles. In this study, two ensemble learning methods-based models; namely, the Random Forest (RF) model and the Least Squares Boosting (LSB) model, are extended to estimate the thermal conductivity of frozen soils. These models utilize basic soil properties as input parameters that include water content, dry density, temperature, and fractions of gravel, sand, silt, and clay, can be measured easily, or determined. Additionally, seven widely used thermal conductivity models, referred to as the traditional models for frozen soils, were evaluated. Both the RF and LSB models, as well as the traditional models, were assessed using data of 823 tests derived from 43 soils with different textures that were gathered from the literature. The results highlight that the traditional models have their strengths and limitations in terms of their use for different types of soils. In contrast, the proposed ensemble learning methods-based models provide higher prediction accuracy compared to the traditional models and can be applied to all soil types and temperature ranges. Furthermore, estimation from the ensemble learning methods-based models can be used to provide probability of multi-dimensional analysis of frozen 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.143 · 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