MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510917761 · doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0032a

Timothy Yield and Nutritive Value by the CATIMO Model: III. Validation for Eastern Canada

2005· article· en· W2510917761 on OpenAlexaffabout
Helge Bonesmo, Gilles Bélanger, E. Charmley, R. Drapeau, Dave B. McKenzie, R. Michaud, Gaëtan F. Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry matterPhleumMean squared errorAnimal scienceCalibrationInterceptionYield (engineering)MathematicsAgronomyEnvironmental scienceChemistryHorticultureBiologyEcologyStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Timothy Model (CATIMO) is a mechanistic simulation model of timothy ( Phleum pratense L.) growth and nutritive value that features radiation interception and use efficiency, leaf and stem growth, leaf senescence, a N function based on the critical N concentration of whole plants, and cell wall (CW) concentration and digestibility of leaves and stems; the model was calibrated with measurements of timothy primary growth from one location (Fredericton, NB, Canada). In this paper, we compare the predictions of the CATIMO model with measurements from a total of six experiments conducted at four locations that cover the pedo‐climatic conditions of eastern Canada (Lévis, QC; Nappan, NS; Normandin, QC; St. John's, NF). Across experiments, the root mean square errors (RMSE) for dry matter (DM) yield varied from 30.9 to 265.9 g DM m −2 and averaged 123.9 g DM m −2 . Omitting one experiment in 1999, however, reduced the overall RMSE to 72.6 g DM m −2 , which is very close to the 65.9 g DM m −2 reported for calibration. The RMSE values across experiments for N concentration (0.013 g g −1 DM), in vitro true dry matter digestibility (0.052 g g −1 DM), CW concentration (0.104 g g −1 DM), and CW digestibility (0.064 g g −1 CW) were higher than those obtained at the calibration site. At three of four locations, however, RMSE values were close to those of the calibration site. The CATIMO model seems robust enough to apply to situations different than those used for calibration, at least within eastern Canada.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207