沟灌土壤入渗插值:克里格法、逆距离加权法、多层感知器法和主成分分析法的比较

Q3 Earth and Planetary Sciences Polish Journal of Soil Science Pub Date : 2019-05-29 DOI:10.17951/PJSS.2019.52.1.59
N. Alipour, A. Nasseri
{"title":"沟灌土壤入渗插值:克里格法、逆距离加权法、多层感知器法和主成分分析法的比较","authors":"N. Alipour, A. Nasseri","doi":"10.17951/PJSS.2019.52.1.59","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Study on soil infiltration rate as part of water cycle is essential for managing water resources and designing irrigation systems. The present study was conducted with the aim to compare Kriging, inverse distance weighting (IDW), multilayer perceptron (MLP) and principal component analysis (PCA) methods in the interpolation of soil infiltration in furrow irrigation, and determine the best interpolation method. To conduct infiltration tests, furrows were made on the farm in four triad groups. Infiltration through the blocked furrows method was measured 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 90, 120, 150, 160, 180 and 210 min after irrigation at a 10-meter distance in each furrow. Data were analyzed by GS+ and Neuro Solutions (NS) software packages. In this study, the maximum error (ME), mean bias error (MBE), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), relative error (RE) and correlation coefficient (r) were used to compare the interpolation methods. The results of analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that differences in methods based on RMSE, MBE, MAE and ME indices were not significant; however, this difference was significant based on r and RE indices. According to the ANOVA results, it can be said that the PCA method with a r of 0.69 and RE of 31%, was predicted with a higher accuracy as compared to other methods.","PeriodicalId":20295,"journal":{"name":"Polish Journal of Soil Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interpolation of soil infiltration in furrow irrigation: Comparison of kriging, inverse distance weighting, multilayer perceptron and principal component analysis methods\",\"authors\":\"N. Alipour, A. Nasseri\",\"doi\":\"10.17951/PJSS.2019.52.1.59\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Study on soil infiltration rate as part of water cycle is essential for managing water resources and designing irrigation systems. The present study was conducted with the aim to compare Kriging, inverse distance weighting (IDW), multilayer perceptron (MLP) and principal component analysis (PCA) methods in the interpolation of soil infiltration in furrow irrigation, and determine the best interpolation method. To conduct infiltration tests, furrows were made on the farm in four triad groups. Infiltration through the blocked furrows method was measured 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 90, 120, 150, 160, 180 and 210 min after irrigation at a 10-meter distance in each furrow. Data were analyzed by GS+ and Neuro Solutions (NS) software packages. In this study, the maximum error (ME), mean bias error (MBE), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), relative error (RE) and correlation coefficient (r) were used to compare the interpolation methods. The results of analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that differences in methods based on RMSE, MBE, MAE and ME indices were not significant; however, this difference was significant based on r and RE indices. According to the ANOVA results, it can be said that the PCA method with a r of 0.69 and RE of 31%, was predicted with a higher accuracy as compared to other methods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polish Journal of Soil Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polish Journal of Soil Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17951/PJSS.2019.52.1.59\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Earth and Planetary Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish Journal of Soil Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17951/PJSS.2019.52.1.59","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

研究土壤入渗速率作为水循环的一部分,对于管理水资源和设计灌溉系统至关重要。本研究旨在比较克里格法、反距离加权法(IDW)、多层感知器(MLP)和主成分分析法(PCA)在沟灌土壤入渗插值中的应用,并确定最佳插值方法。为了进行渗透测试,农场分成四个黑社会小组。在灌溉后10、20、30、40、50、60、90、120、150、160、180和210分钟,在每个犁沟中以10米的距离测量通过堵塞犁沟法的渗透。数据通过GS+和Neuro Solutions(NS)软件包进行分析。在本研究中,使用最大误差(ME)、平均偏误(MBE)、平均绝对误差(MAE)、均方根误差(RMSE)、相对误差(RE)和相关系数(r)来比较插值方法。方差分析结果表明,基于RMSE、MBE、MAE和ME指数的方法差异不显著;然而,基于r和RE指数,这种差异是显著的。根据ANOVA结果,可以说,与其他方法相比,预测r为0.69、RE为31%的PCA方法具有更高的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Interpolation of soil infiltration in furrow irrigation: Comparison of kriging, inverse distance weighting, multilayer perceptron and principal component analysis methods
Study on soil infiltration rate as part of water cycle is essential for managing water resources and designing irrigation systems. The present study was conducted with the aim to compare Kriging, inverse distance weighting (IDW), multilayer perceptron (MLP) and principal component analysis (PCA) methods in the interpolation of soil infiltration in furrow irrigation, and determine the best interpolation method. To conduct infiltration tests, furrows were made on the farm in four triad groups. Infiltration through the blocked furrows method was measured 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 90, 120, 150, 160, 180 and 210 min after irrigation at a 10-meter distance in each furrow. Data were analyzed by GS+ and Neuro Solutions (NS) software packages. In this study, the maximum error (ME), mean bias error (MBE), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), relative error (RE) and correlation coefficient (r) were used to compare the interpolation methods. The results of analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that differences in methods based on RMSE, MBE, MAE and ME indices were not significant; however, this difference was significant based on r and RE indices. According to the ANOVA results, it can be said that the PCA method with a r of 0.69 and RE of 31%, was predicted with a higher accuracy as compared to other methods.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Polish Journal of Soil Science
Polish Journal of Soil Science Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth-Surface Processes
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: The Journal focuses mainly on all issues of soil sciences, agricultural chemistry, soil technology and protection and soil environmental functions. Papers concerning various aspects of functioning of the environment (including geochemistry, geomophology, geoecology etc.) as well as new techniques of surveing, especially remote sensing, are also published.
期刊最新文献
Application Technique and Dosage of Halotolerant Nitrogen Biofertilizer for Increasing Soil Total N, N Uptake, Chlorophyll Content, Photosynthate Accumulation and Growth of Rice Plants in Saline Ecosystem Distribution of Carbon Stocks in Peat Bottom Based on Thickness Class in Pelalawan Village (Riau Province, Indonesia) Characterization and Bioassay of Rhizophosphate Bacteria Producing Phytohormone and Organic Acid to Enhance the Maize Seedling Growth Black Soils Outside of the INBS Criteria in Slovakia Effects of Different Land Use Types on Soil Physico-Chemical Properties in Wolaita Zone, Ethiopia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1