MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476959888 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511974199.022

Evolution of wheat production systems in southern Australia

2011· book-chapter· en· W2476959888 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David J. Connor, R. S. Loomis, Kenneth G. Cassman

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPasture and Agricultural Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)GeographyProduction system (computer science)AgroforestryAgronomyBiologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wheat has been grown in Australia since European settlement, initially to feed colonists, but soon as an export crop. Although total national production, 19 Mt (five-year average 2003–2008), remains small by world standards, the high proportion (60%) that is exported ranks Australia fourth, after the USA, Canada, and the EU, among wheat exporting countries. This chapter describes the continuing evolution of wheat-cropping systems in semi-arid southern Australia (annual rainfall 300–500 mm) using yield data for the State of Victoria from soon after inception of the industry c . 1800. The analysis reveals how a sequence of cropping systems has developed in response to technological innovation , economic incentives , and societal pressures . Economic pressure to compete on world markets has been, and will likely remain, a major driver of change in these cropping systems. Producers receive little subsidy to relieve competitive pressure. Among OECD countries, subsidies account for 25 and 40% of farm income in the USA and the EU, respectively, but only 6% in Australia. Driving forces for change may be further complicated by widely anticipated climate change. Producers, agronomists, and researchers now have access to new tools to meet the increasingly complex objectives that must account for variability in climatic and economic environments, and also address societal interests. The principles and range of strategies and tactics available to combat crop response to low and variable rainfall have been presented in Chapters 9 and 13.

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)0.001
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.142 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicPasture and Agricultural SystemsFrench-language works237,207