Bibliographic record
Abstract
Land rolling of soybean fields has become a popular practice in north central and northwest Iowa during the past five years. Although this technique was first utilized to push rocks into the ground to avoid combine damage and aid in harvesting lodged crops in Canada, producers in Iowa quickly learned that pushing corn root-balls flat at the time of planting and pushing small rocks into the ground can increase harvest efficiency. Typically fields are rolled shortly after planting. One disturbing trend that was noticed, however, was that rolled fields tended to have more water standing between the rows after moderate or heavy rain events. This would imply that water infiltration was slower in fields that had been rolled compared with fields that had not been rolled. Infiltration measurements were taken on a few plots in 2010 at the ISU Northern Research Farm. It seemed that water infiltration was less on the rolled plots. However, we wanted more measurements before publishing any results. In 2011 infiltration measurements were taken on the research farm and on neighboring farms where soybeans had been rolled. The goal was to determine if water infiltration had been reduced by land rolling.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".