MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2361343930

Water requirement of maize under different precipitation years in Changling County,Jilin Province

2014· article· en· W2361343930 on OpenAlexaff
Duan Pei-l

Bibliographic record

VenueGanhan diqu nongye yanjiu · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Agricultural Sciences
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrrigationWater consumptionEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationAnimal scienceAgronomyDry weightSoil waterHydrology (agriculture)GeographyBiologyEnvironmental engineeringGeologySoil science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the field experiment in Changling County,Jilin Province,the water requirement of maize growth and the changes of water source in different years( wet year,normal year,dry year and extremely dry year) based on the same soil and farm management conditions were discussed. The results showed that water demand was different in different stages of maize growth. It reached the highest at mid-development stage,and was relatively small at early and late stage. According to the water requirement of maize growth,the test years were sequenced as: 2007( 460. 2 mm) 2006( 423. 8 mm) 2008( 393. 5 mm) 2005( 342 mm). The drier the year was,the more the total water amount and water per unit dry weight were required. The coupling degree of water requirement and effective precipitation was the highest in wet year,followed by normal year and dry year,and the lowest in extremely dry year. The soil water consumption from 2005 to 2008 was 79. 8 mm,199. 1 mm,222. 7 mm and 104. 6 mm,respectively. The drier the year was,the more the soil water was consumed. During the growth period of maize,the soil water consumption was much great in July and August,thus it was necessary to increase irrigation appropriately.

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 score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGanhan diqu nongye yanjiuSame topicEnvironmental and Agricultural SciencesFrench-language works237,207