Vulnerability of Maize Yields to Droughts in Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate projections in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) forecast an increase in the intensity and frequency of droughts with implications for maize production. While studies have examined how maize might be affected at the continental level, there have been few national or sub-national studies of vulnerability. We develop a vulnerability index that combines sensitivity, exposure and adaptive capacity and that integrates agroecological, climatic and socio-economic variables to evaluate the national and spatial pattern of maize yield vulnerability to droughts in Uganda. The results show that maize yields in the north of Uganda are more vulnerable to droughts than in the south and nationally. Adaptive capacity is higher in the south of the country than in the north. Maize yields also record higher levels of sensitivity and exposure in the north of Uganda than in the south. Latitudinally, it is observed that maize yields in Uganda tend to record higher levels of vulnerability, exposure and sensitivity towards higher latitudes, while in contrast, the adaptive capacity of maize yields is higher towards the lower latitudes. In addition to lower precipitation levels in the north of the country, these observations can also be explained by poor soil quality in most of the north and socio-economic proxies, such as, higher poverty and lower literacy rates in the north of Uganda.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".