MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965347483

The Cashew Nut Industry in India: Growth and Prospects

2007· article· en· W1965347483 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D Vellingiri, Dhanalakshmi Thiyagarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe IUP Journal of Agricultural Economics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGinkgo biloba and Cashew Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCashew nutProductivityProduction (economics)BusinessAgricultural economicsIncentiveAgricultural scienceEconomicsEconomic growthBiologyMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study makes an attempt to assess the overall profile of the Indian cashew industry, particularly in terms of production and exports. The results indicate that cashew production in India has been fluctuating during the recent years. It is evident from the study that Maharashtra produces more cashew compared to the other states in India, as its average productivity and the area under cashew cultivation are more than that of the other states. The Indian cashew kernel is highly appreciated in other countries for good quality, taste, and appearance; and is consumed in more than 60 countries across the world. The United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Japan, Australia, Canada, Germany, Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, and the Middle East countries are the major export markets for Indian cashew nuts. In spite of its significant growth, the cashew industry in India has been suffering from poor quality of cashew grown in some states, which is mainly due to wrong harvesting technique, unsatis factory drying of the nuts and inadequate storage and warehouse facilities for storing dried cashew nuts. Thus, the paper suggests that the cashew industry needs certain incentives to achieve a higher growth rate of production as well as exports in future.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe IUP Journal of Agricultural EconomicsSame topicGinkgo biloba and Cashew ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207