Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tomatoes rank fourth among the leading world vegetables. In 2001, over 100 million metric tons were produced, with the 15 leading countries being (in descending order) China, US, India, Turkey, Egypt, Italy, Spain, Brazil, Islamic Republic of Iran, Mexico, Greece, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Chile, and Uzbekistan (FAO 2002; Fig. 1.1). There has been a general upward trend in tomato production during the period 1992–2002 (Fig. 1.2). Interestingly, the countries that produce higher yields (Fig. 1.3) do not possess the ideal climate for the tomato crop and have less land area devoted to tomato production (Fig. 1.4). Northern European countries, as well as Canada and New Zealand, produce most of their tomatoes under controlled greenhouse conditions. Tomato consumption has also shown a general increased trend of consumption over a period of time (FAO 2002). Tomatoes supply a mean of 12.1 kg/cap/yr, and tomato consumption is higher in Mediterranean and Arab countries (usually between 40 and 60 kg/cap/yr). Tomatoes are highly popular in Egypt, Italy, Israel, Lebanon, Turkey and United Arab Emirates (60–70 kg/cap/yr), whereas people from Greece and Libya have the highest preference consuming more than 100 kg of tomatoes per capita and year. Tomatoes are also a popular food in Latin and North America. Fig. 1.1 Tomato production worldwide, 2001. https://s3-euw1-ap-pe-df-pch-content-public-p.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/9780429063671/e7aeba4a-28c6-4fe4-992f-c8d2fb8975d8/content/fig1_1.tif"/> Fig. 1.2 Tomato production worldwide, 1992–2001. https://s3-euw1-ap-pe-df-pch-content-public-p.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/9780429063671/e7aeba4a-28c6-4fe4-992f-c8d2fb8975d8/content/fig1_2.tif"/> Fig. 1.3 Tomato yield worldwide, 2001. https://s3-euw1-ap-pe-df-pch-content-public-p.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/9780429063671/e7aeba4a-28c6-4fe4-992f-c8d2fb8975d8/content/fig1_3.tif"/> Fig. 1.4 Area of tomato harvest worldwide, 2001. https://s3-euw1-ap-pe-df-pch-content-public-p.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/9780429063671/e7aeba4a-28c6-4fe4-992f-c8d2fb8975d8/content/fig1_4.tif"/>
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.204 | 0.268 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it