30 años usando un herbicida de baja peligrosidad. Cómo mantener sus beneficios en el futuro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En el numero especial de septiembre de 1994 conmemorando su centenario, la revista Farm Chemicals International publicaba una encuesta en la que el herbicida Roundup* aparecia entre los 10 principales productos que han cambiado la agricultura. Diez anos mas tarde, seguro que la importancia de este herbicida sigue siendo igual o superior, pues su empleo se ha triplicado desde entonces (Monsanto 2001 Annual Report), especialmente en paises como Argentina, Brasil, Canada o Estados Unidos, en los que se han comercializado con excelente aceptacion variedades de cultivos tolerantes a su materia activa. Una parte importante de este exito corresponde a las favorables caracteristicas de su materia activa, como la baja toxicidad y su inactivacion en contacto con el suelo, pero en esta revision queremos recordar los avances debidos a la innovacion de muchos tecnicos que han trabajado con Monsanto para mejorar su aplicacion, y algunos aspectos en los que hay que seguir insistiendo para permitir un empleo sin problemas en el futuro.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".