MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278839657 · doi:10.4271/2003-01-2357

Integrated Multicropping of Beet and Lettuce and its Effect on Atmospheric Stability

2003· article· en· W2278839657 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Stasiak, Geoffrey Waters, Youbin Zheng, Bernard Grodzinski, Michael Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanadian Space AgencyEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceStability (learning theory)Remote sensingComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">It is understood that plants and microorganisms will be an intrinsic part of future advanced life support (ALS) systems. The photosynthetic process is uniquely able to provide food and water from transpiration, remove carbon dioxide, and produce oxygen. However, atmospheric management with typical monoculture batch plant growth is made difficult due to fluctuating rates of CO<sub>2</sub> assimilation and O<sub>2</sub> production during different phases of plant growth and development. Experiments on the effect of continuous production of multiple crops with rotational planting on atmospheric stability within a sealed environment were performed in the Controlled Environment Systems Research Facility ambient pressure controlled environment chambers. Two of the ESA-MELiSSA candidate crops, beet and lettuce, were continuously grown with a ten day staggered planting interval, resulting in a plant canopy with all representative stages of physiological growth within a common atmosphere. The data will be discussed with respect to improving atmospheric stability during long-term crop production in advanced life support systems for the manned space program.</div>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207