The relative hydraulic conductivity model of soil “Guelph Loam”
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relevance of the study is closely related to the urgent demands of society for the development of technologies that allow saving water resources, as well as agrochemicals when cultivating agricultural crops on irrigated lands. The goal outlined by the authors is to fill in the missing ideas about the physical nature of the interactions of the solid and liquid phases of the soil for the development of hydraulic functions, such as its moisture conductivity. The subject of the study is the most important patterns that control the water-physical properties of the soil. The research method is mathematical modelling. The work uses the proposed original function of soil moisture conductivity, which has parameters that allow interpretation. The correlation estimates of the modelling results and experimental data from the literature are given. Two options for setting the exponential parameter of the moisture conductivity function are discussed, including an option that allows eliminating the possible undesirable methodological effect of crossing the scanning and main branches of hysteresis of the water physical properties of the soil. The method has potential for effective application in precision irrigated agriculture.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it