MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514796543 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2016-0053

Will summer fallow re-emerge in the Dark Brown soil zone of the Canadian Prairie as a response to net return risk?

2016· article· en· W2514796543 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Danny LeRoy, Elwin G. Smith, Phyllis Maccallum, H. H. Janzen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersAlberta Agriculture and Forestry
KeywordsCrop rotationSummer fallowForageAgronomyLegumeAgricultureManureLivestockMathematicsEnvironmental scienceGeographyCropBiologyEcologyForestryCropping

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assessed the extent to which summer fallow in the Dark Brown soil zone is likely to return as a response to net return (NR) risk. An economic model was used to identify, delineate, and quantify the effects of changes in product prices and input costs on the long-term economic performance of cereal, legume forage, and legume green manure rotations, based on a long-term study at the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Research and Development Centre in Lethbridge, Alberta. The analysis determined NR from the rotations and simulated NR in a stochastic risk model. Each rotation had a different yield distribution and cost profile. The NR risk for the rotations was evaluated using stochastic efficiency with respect to a function. A risk-free return was computed to rank the rotations. Continuous fertilized wheat was the most profitable crop rotation, followed by three-year rotations with fallow and either nitrogen fertilized wheat or livestock manure applied after fallow. Rotations with higher NR used less fallow but had higher risk. Summer fallow is unlikely to re-emerge as only rather risk averse and very risk averse growers would use summer fallow as a means of reducing NR risk.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.856

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207