MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2273537778

Multicriteria evaluation of direct seeding mulch based cropping systems (DMC) in the context of small scale farmers in the Cerrados Region of Brazil

2010· preprint· en· W2273537778 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Scopel, Flandin, José Humberto Valadares Xavier, Marc Corbeels, Fernando Antônio Macena da Silva, François Affholder, Frédérique Angevin, Stéphane de Tourdonnet, Christophe David

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Management and Crop Yield
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgroforestryMulchContext (archaeology)Soil fertilityLand degradationEnvironmental scienceCroppingCropping systemAgricultureSustainabilityAgricultural scienceSoil waterGeographyAgronomyCropForestryEcologySoil scienceBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In central Brazil, the tropical savannah ecosystem known as Cerrado, small scale farmers (around 20 ha) occupy marginal land scattered among large commercial farms on wide plateaux. Close to 90 % of the agricultural land farmed by large holders in the Cerrado is managed under direct seeding mulch based cropping systems (DMC). However, this system is almost not used by small scale farmers of the same region, even if their soils are often very susceptible to degradation (erosion, losses of soil organic matter), and they crucially need to stabilize their corn production in other to insure sustainability. Since 2005, Embrapa and Cirad tried to develop, in interaction with small farmers of Unaí region (Minas Gerais), new DMC systems adapted to their conditions and compatible with their own objectives. However, even if those systems increase soil fertility significantly, they also often deeply modify crop management as well as the use of resources available at farm level. Such systems have thus strong consequences on economical, environmental or social aspects of the system, (Scopel et al., 2005).

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicSoil Management and Crop YieldFrench-language works237,207