Investigating the Relationships Between Age and Depth of Stockpiled Topsoil with Its Nutrient Content: An Analysis of Responsible Factors and Potential Consequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Storing topsoil in stockpiles is intended to preserve the quality of soils for reclamation purposes. Literature review revealed inconsistent and sometimes conflicting data that points to potential degradation concerns. The research completed included analyzing soil samples from three different ages of 44 years, 25 years and 5 years storage that were sampled in the Carmon Creek area of the Peace Region of Northern Alberta. The samples were analyzed for pH, macronutrients, micronutrients, total organic carbon and organic matter. Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis were used to determine if there were significant chemistry changes between age and depth of stockpiled soils. The results indicated a small change in organic matter and carbon but a large change in pH, electrical conductivity, calcium, nitrates and sulphates and some fixation of phosphates and potassium in age and depth of soil stockpiles. This could create challenges for the use of the stockpiled soils in reclamation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".