MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2305986087 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.41.3.513c

GREENHOUSE-TOMATOES: A NEW E-LIST FOR COMMERCIAL GROWERS

2006· article· en· W2305986087 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard G. Snyder

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFlowering Plant Growth and Cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhousePromotion (chess)Agricultural scienceBusinessHorticultureEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The greenhouse-tomatoes list was created to provide a method for commercial greenhouse tomato growers to communicate with each other to learn from others' experiences. Its purpose is to connect growers with vendors of greenhouses, fertilizers, seeds, and other supplies, and to facilitate networking among growers, agents, specialists, and researchers. The goal of the greenhouse-tomatoes list is to develop high quality discussion that benefits commercial growers and the entire greenhouse tomato industry. This is accomplished by promoting the list to growers; keeping the list small so that the traffic is manageable; avoiding promotion to hobbyists so the list does not become cluttered; avoiding SPAM. Excellent majordomo software has been 100% effective in the latter. The list was first offered to growers at the 2004 Greenhouse Tomato Short Course (GHSC) in Jackson, Miss. Then, it was promoted through other e-lists for vegetable specialists, new crops, greenhouse growers, hydroponics, etc. The final phase was to promote it at various grower meetings around the U.S., through trade magazines, and at the 2005 GHSC. Currently, the list consists of 141 members. Subscribers are from the U.S., Argentina, Australia, Canada, England, Germany, Newfoundland, Pakistan, Romania, South Africa, Virgin Islands, and Thailand. Demographics are 31% university, 15% suppliers, 34% growers, 20% unknown. The greenhouse-tomatoes list is housed on a server at Mississippi State University with nearly all functions handled seamlessly by majordomo software. To subscribe: send e-mail to majordomo@lists.msstate.edu with the following message: subscribe greenhouse-tomatoes. You will get a confirmation email telling you that you must reply. You must be subscribed to send anything to the list. Once subscribed, to communicate with the whole group, address an email message to greenhouse-tomatoes@lists.msstate.edu and everybody on the list will receive it. To make this easy, the user can save that address to a nickname, such as ght or greenhouselist. More information can be found at http://www.greenhousetomatosc.com .

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicFlowering Plant Growth and CultivationFrench-language works237,207