ArticleScientific reports2025
Identification of soil texture and color using machine learning algorithms and satellite imagery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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
- Retraction · 2026-02-04Concerns/Issues about Authorship/Affiliation · Lack of Approval from Author ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The demand for high-quality and cost-effective soil information is increasing due to its importance in land-use planning and precision agriculture. This study aimed to estimate soil texture and color using satellite imagery as input variables for support vector regression (SVR) and decision tree regression (DTR) models. Soil properties, including soil texture (clay, silt, and sand) and color components (Hue, Value, and Chroma), were measured. Additionally, a wide range of indices derived from MODIS sensor imagery were calculated. Duncan's test at a 5% significance level revealed significant temporal differences among the indices, although no significant differences were observed in the mean indices concerning soil texture variability. The results of error metrics, including root mean squared error (RMSE), absolute mean absolute percentage error (AMAPE), mean absolute error (MAE), mean squared error (MSE), and ratio of performance to deviation (RPD), demonstrated the superiority of the SVR method over the DTR method. Soil texture classification using the soil texture triangle and validation methods showed good agreement between measured and predicted data using the SVR approach. The lowest RMSE was observed for Hue, indicating the most accurate prediction, whereas sand showed the highest error. The differences in error metrics, including RMSE, AMAPE, MAE, MSE, and RPD, between SVR and DTR methods were 0, 0.2, 0, 0, and 0.8 for Hue and 0.41, 5, 0.1, 0.1, and 0.87 for sand, respectively. For future research, it is recommended to explore the combination of SVR with optimization techniques such as genetic algorithms to further improve the accuracy of soil texture and color predictions.
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.