Primary competition visual

Amini Soil Prediction Challenge

Helping Africa
$7 000 USD
Completed (over 1 year ago)
Prediction
Earth Observation
1076 joined
336 active
Starti
02 Apr 25
Closei
22 Jun 25
Reveali
23 Jun 25
Difference Locations in Train and Test sets
Data · 16 Jun 2025, 21:04 · 6

Locations in the test set are outside the range of training locations; which might cause models that overly rely on lat, lon features or earth observations data to overfit to the training set.

Update: After testing various models, location-dependent approaches consistently outperform others in both CV and LB scores. The best-performing model actively uses location data without overfitting, still note minding this difference between train and test data.

Discussion 6 answers
User avatar

Interesting! In this case how do you avoid shake up?

Upvotes 0
User avatar
CodeJoe

I think random forest handles such noise better, however a shakeup is inevitable because of the RMSE metric.

What do you guys think? @omerym10 what models are you using?

Upvotes 0
User avatar

Im using xgboost it gave me better score in cv and lb. But only after tuning hyper parameters.

Upvotes 0
User avatar
CodeJoe

Oh interesting. Mine is random forest. Funny enough xgboost gave me the worst result maybe because I didn't hyperparameter tune. I was around 14xx 😅.

Upvotes 0
User avatar

Yes out of the box random forest gave me the best lb score but after tuning the best was xgboost.

Upvotes 1
User avatar
CodeJoe

That is great. Good luck!

Upvotes 0