Water vapor sorption isotherms of salt-affected soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Salt-affected soils, including saline and alkali soils, cover about 7% of the land area on earth. Their interaction with water differs from non-saline soils, thereby exhibiting distinct fundamental properties and mechanical and hydrological behaviors. The soil–water interaction is generally assessed by water vapor sorption isotherm, i.e., the relationship between soil water content and ambient relative humidity under isotherm conditions. Yet to date, there still lacks a comprehensive dataset of water vapor sorption isotherms of salt-affected soils. This study presents a water vapor isotherm dataset encompassing six distinct soil types, ranging from sandy soil to expansive clayey soils. These soils were mixed with four salt types, including NaCl, KCl, MgCl2, and LiCl, at varying salt content, yielding 33 combinations of salt-affected soil samples. The results reveal three intriguing features of vapor sorption behaviors of salt-affected soils: (1) the presence of soil lowers the deliquescence relative humidity (DRH) of the salt in it, suggesting a potential interaction between soil solid and salt crystals; (2) the wetting–drying isotherm hysteresis of salt-affected soils significantly increase with salt content, even for non-expansive soils, implying a crystal nucleation process of salts in soils upon drying; and (3) sodium salt abnormally lowers adsorption capacity of Ca-montmorillonite in low RH range, demonstrating the existence of cation exchange between salt and interlayer cations. A parametric study is conducted to illustrate the implications of DRH on soil hydraulic conductivity curves, revealing that the breaking points in isotherms of salt-affected soils correspond to notable shifts in hydraulic behaviors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".