Machine Learning-Based Classification of Soil Parent Materials Using Elemental Concentration and Vis-NIR Data
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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Switzerland), 2024-08, Vol.24 (16), p.5126 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | 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
O
, Al
O
, MgO, and MnO; XRF: SiO
, CaO, Fe
O
, Al
O, and MnO; Vis-NIR: 567, 571, 572, 573, and 574 nm). Subsequent soil reclassification using these reduced variables revealed reduced accuracies using Vis-NIR data, with ESKNN still yielding the best results. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1424-8220 1424-8220 |
DOI: | 10.3390/s24165126 |