ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Machine Learning-Based Classification of Soil Parent Materials Using Elemental Concentration and Vis-NIR Data.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In soil science, the allocation of soil samples to their respective origins holds paramount significance, as it serves as a crucial investigative tool. In recent times, with the increasing use of proximal sensing and advancements in machine-learning techniques, new approaches have accompanied these developments, enhancing the effectiveness of soil utilization in soil science. This study investigates soil classification based on four parent materials. For this purpose, a total of 59 soil samples were collected from 12 profiles and the vicinity of each profile at a depth of 0-30 cm. Surface soil samples were analyzed for elemental concentrations using X-Ray fluorescence (XRF) and inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) and soil spectra using a visible near-infrared (Vis-NIR) spectrometer. Soil samples collected from soil profiles (12 soil samples) and surface (47 soil samples) were used to classify parent materials using machine learning-based algorithms such as Support Vector Machine (SVM), Ensemble Subspace k-Near Neighbor (ESKNN), and Ensemble Bagged Trees (EBTs). Additionally, as a validation of the classification techniques, the dataset was subjected to five-fold cross-validation and independent sample set splitting (80% calibration and 20% validation). Evaluation metrics such as accuracy, F score, and G mean were used to evaluate prediction performance. Depending on the dataset and algorithm used, the classification success rates varied between 70% and 100%. Overall, the ESKNN (99%) produced better results than other classification methods. Additionally, Relief algorithms were employed to identify key variables for each dataset (ICP-OES: CaO, Fe
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.