Trinken Kühe Kalzium?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate how well cows drink the Propeller calcium drink, and it's effect on blood calcium concentration. Drinking was tested in 120 cows right after calving, before cows drank anything else. 60 cows each were offered 20 liters of Propeller calcium drink or 20 liters of water. Cows drank the Propeller as good as water. 72% of all cows drank all 20 liters, 18% drank on average 8.2 liters and 10% drank less than 1 liter. Blood calcium concentration was studied in 16 cows right after calving. Eight cows each were offered 20 liters of Propeller calcium drink or no calcium drink. Blood calcium significantly increased ten minutes after Propeller intake and stayed significantly elevated for 24 hours. Without calcium drink blood calcium levels decreased significantly. Advantages of the new Propeller calcium drink over calcium gels or boli could be that cows now drink calcium themselves and that the Propeller increases blood calcium concentration rapidly and long lasting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.018 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".