PRESERVATION Responsibilities of Homemakers in Processing, Storage and Preservation of Pepper (Capsicum Specie) in Southern Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is directed towards the identification of activities to be conducted by women in processing, storage and preservation of pepper (capsicum species) in Southern Nigeria. Three (3) research questions and three (3) hypotheses guided the study. This study adopted survey research design, with 39 structured questionnaire items used for data collection. The questionnaire was faced validated by five experts in food science and technology and vocational teachers' education (Agric); three were knowledgeable in pepper processing. Cronbach alpha method was used to determine the internal consistency of the items with a co-efficient of 0.90. The sample was 700, made up of 630 home economists, 30 home economic teachers and 40 female teachers of Agriculture. The data was analyzed using weighted mean, standard deviation to answer research questions Analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test the hypothesis. It was discovered that 39 items were identified as responsibilities (duties) of homemakers in planning, processing, storing and preserving and marketing processed pepper in Southern Nigerian. Recommendations for effectiveness towards processing and preserving pepper for food security was made; among others.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".