MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993680212 · doi:10.1520/jai12164

Predicted Deposition Variability Due to Fluctuations in Release Height and Drop Size Distribution

2005· article· en· W1993680212 on OpenAlexaff
M. E. Teske, HW Thistle, RC Reardon, G Cormier, Peter Amirault, DC Davies, R Scott Cameron, G. J. Dorr, Andrew Hewitt, JR Brown, MY LeClerc, Anandakumar Karipot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of ASTM International · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Surface Properties and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Fredericton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeposition (geology)Environmental scienceBounding overwatchDrop (telecommunication)MeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesMaterials scienceComputer scienceGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An extensive field study has been undertaken to quantify the aerial release of spray material through the changes in meteorology as the day progresses. An important subset of these collected data is one-second interval data of the aircraft behavior and the mechanical release systems. These unique data provide an excellent source of information on bounding the variability in the expected deposition patterns, and how this variability might impact any error bounds established around the time-averaged predictions generated by the AGDISP model. This paper quantifies the variability in aerial application parameters and makes suggestions with regard to possible implications of this variability on the variability of deposition predictions in the flight line direction.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ASTM InternationalSame topicPlant Surface Properties and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207