The Raised Bed System of Cultivation for Irrigated Production Conditions
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
The adoption of conservation agriculture technologies, which are characterized by minimal soil disturbance (tillage) before seeding (with the ultimate aim being zero-till seeding) and by diverse strategies to increase crop residue retention on the soil surface to ensure full ground cover (leading essentially to biological tillage) over time, has dramatically increased in many countries over the past 25 years. For example, there are now over 28 million ha of zero-till seeding in Latin America with the bulk concentrated in the southern cone countries of Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay (Derpsch, 2001). Table 1 lists the adoption of zero-till in the world up to 2001 (Derpsch, 2001). Much of this acreage is zero-till with residue retention. However, upon closer inspection, the adoption of reducedzero-till seeding combined with surface crop residue retention in the countries mentioned above as well as other large area adopters such as the United States, Canada, and Australia, and particularly for wheat production systems, has occurred mainly by large-scale farmers and nearly universally for rainfed production systems with a few exceptions where sprinkle irrigation is used. The apparent exclusion of small-scale farmers in general and for essentially all surface-irrigatedproduction systems (especially where irrigated wheat is a major crop in the system) has several explanations.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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