Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 731

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 161 of the 161 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Machine learning for digital soil mapping: Applications, challenges and suggested solutions

Open access
Wadoux, Alexandre M.J.-C., Minasny, Budiman, McBratney, Alex B.·2020·Earth-Science Reviews

Abstract

The uptake of machine learning (ML) algorithms in digital soil mapping (DSM) is transforming the way soil scientists produce their maps. Machine learning is currently applied to mapping soil properties or classes much in the same way as other unrelated fields of science. Mapping of soil, however, has unique aspects which require adaptations of the ML algorithms. These features are for example, but not limited to, the inclusion of pedological knowledge into the ML algorithm, the accounting of spatial structure present in the soil data, or the desire to increase our scientific understanding of the distribution and genesis of soil from a calibrated ML model. Tackling these challenges is critical for machine learning to gain credibility and scientific consistency in soil science. In this article, we review the current applications of machine learning in digital soil mapping and suggest improvements. We found a growing interest of the use of ML in DSM. Most studies focus on obtaining accurate maps and disregard the characteristics of soil data, such as spatial autocorrelation. Only a few studies account for existing soil knowledge or quantify the uncertainty of the predicted maps. We then discuss the challenges related to the application of ML for soil mapping and offer solutions from existing studies in the natural sciences. The challenges are organized as follows: sampling, resampling, accounting for the spatial information, multivariate mapping, uncertainty analysis, validation, integration of pedological knowledge and, interpretation of the models. We conclude that for future developments, machine learning should incorporate three core elements: plausibility, interpretability, and explainability, which will trigger soil scientists to move beyond model prediction and towards explanation of soil processes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103359

Cites

161 of 161 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 161 references

Metadata

Authors
Wadoux, A. M. J.-C., Minasny, B., & McBratney, A. B.
Venue
Earth-Science Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
210
Pages
103359
ISSN
0012-8252 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3086056576
Cited by
731
References
161
FWCI
21.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Machine learning for digital soil mapping: Applications, challenges and suggested solutions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103359
The paper
Wadoux, A. M. J.-C., Minasny, B., & McBratney, A. B. (2020). Machine learning for digital soil mapping: Applications, challenges and suggested solutions. Earth-Science Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103359

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.