MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2499615746 · doi:10.2134/agronmonogr42.c16

Small Grain Silage

2003· other· en· W2499615746 on OpenAlex
J.J. Kennelly, Z.G. Weinberg

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy monograph/Agronomy · 2003
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilageTriticaleAgronomyForagePastureHayBiologyCropLivestockBiomass (ecology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small grain cereals include wheat, barley, oat, rye, and triticale. Forage cereals are widely used in many countries in various forms, including pasture, hay, silage, and grain. The use of mixtures of different plant species for small grain silage production may offer advantages over a single species. The nutritive value of small grain cereal silage is influenced by a variety of factors, including stage of maturity, animal species, chemical composition, level of intake, proportion of silage in the ration, and the method of conservation. All these factors affect the production of dairy, beef cattle, and sheep and must be considered when formulating rations for livestock. Much of the research needed in the field of whole-crop small grain silage relates to improving the biomass in order to obtain higher yields and enhanced quality. This pertains to cultivar development that would result in properties custom-tailored according to needs.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.186 · 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