MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072001697 · doi:10.1300/j301v03n01_03

The Wild Blueberry Industry—Past

2004· article· en· W2072001697 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall Fruits Review · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBerry genetics and cultivation research
Canadian institutionsGovernment of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVacciniumNova scotiaGeographySilvicultureAgroforestryForestryHorticultureEnvironmental scienceArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY This paper, presented as part of a symposium at the 9th North American Blueberry Research and Extension Workers Conference, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, August 18-21, 2002, traces the early history of the wild blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium, Aiton, and Vaccinium myrtilloides, Michaux) in eastern North America. Wild blueberry production is traced from consumption of native blueberries by animals and native North Americans, through early commercial production in Canada and the United States, up to the present time. Different management methods adopted as the scientific knowledge increased are described. Early management consisted of burning fields one spring and harvesting the fruit in August of the following year. Over the last century, several new practices have been introduced to increase blueberry yields. These include the oil burner, the flail mower, the mechanical harvester, increased use of selective herbicides, increased use of managed pollinators, and extensive land leveling.

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.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.217 · 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