Comparison of Post-harvest Practices of the Individual Farmers and the Farmers in Cooperative of Côte d’Ivoire and Statistical Identification of Modalities Responsible of Non-quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this study were to compare the modalities of the post-harvest practices of these two groups and to statistically identify the modalities responsible of non-quality (under grade) on the basis of results of Pareto chart and proportion of successes calculated for each modality. A survey about of modalities of post-harvest processing methods and about the quality of the beans obtained was conducted among producers of the largest producing region of Côte d’Ivoire. The collected data were analyzed by the chi-square test of concordance and the Pareto chart. The results show that there is no correlation between practice of the individual farmers and the farmers in cooperatives. Highly significant differences (p-value < 0.001) were observed in the number of brewing; the fermentation time; the materials of fermentation and drying impacting the quality of merchantable cocoa. Samples collected from farmers into cooperatives have fewer defects than those of individual farmers. Regarding the modalities of the post-harvest practice responsible of the under-grades, the results showed that the samples of farmers in cooperatives had fewer defects than those of individual farmers. Thus, obtaining a good quality cocoa beans must take into account the best modality at each step of post-harvest practices. However certain modality should be avoided. These are: the time breaking pods of one day; the absence of brewing during the fermentation; the time of fermentation less than or equal to three days and the time of drying less than or equal to two days.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".