MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2379055873

Farmer Nutrient Management Decisions: A Study of Farms in the Gully Creek Watershed in Southern Ontario

2016· dissertation· en· W2379055873 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer E. Leslie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatershedWatershed managementHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementGeographyNutrientEnvironmental scienceGully erosionAgroforestryGeologyEcologyErosionBiologyGeomorphology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Ontario there has been increased concern regarding harmful algae blooms in Lake Erie, phosphorus has been identified as the growth limiting agent. This research examines farmers’ individual nutrient management decisions to understand if the actual nutrient application rates are equal to the recommended NMAN rate (NE). I use two alternative nutrient rate criteria and a regression analysis to further examine nutrient application decisions. I use a unique data set from the Gully Creek watershed that contains farmers’ individual nutrient application decisions for phosphorus and nitrogen, spanning 2008 to 2013. In corn production, farmers were found to apply nitrogen below the NE, and phosphorus above the NE. In winter wheat production, farmers were found to apply both nitrogen and phosphorus above the NE. The regression analysis identified that larger farms, lower yielding fields, and the application of manure influence farmers’ decisions to apply nutrients in excess of the NE rate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.205
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207