ArticlePeerJ2022
Machine learning based estimation of field-scale daily, high resolution, multi-depth soil moisture for the Western and Midwestern United States.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: High-resolution soil moisture estimates are critical for planning water management and assessing environmental quality. Methods: We applied nearly one million national library soil moisture records from over 100 sites, spanning the U.S. Midwest and West, to build Quantile Random Forest (QRF) calibration models. The QRF models were built on covariates including soil moisture estimates from North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS), soil properties, climate variables, digital elevation models, and remote sensing-derived indices. We also explored an alternative approach that adopted a regionalized calibration dataset for the Western U.S. The broad-scale QRF models were independently validated according to sampling depths, land cover type, and observation period. We then explored the model performance improved with local samples used for spiking. Finally, the QRF models were applied to estimate soil moisture at the field scale where evaluation was carried out to check estimated temporal and spatial patterns. Results: The broad-scale QRF model showed moderate performance (R Conclusions: The model accuracy for top 0-20 cm soil depth (R
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.