MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605954450

China: Voices for Sustainable Agriculture

2007· other· en· W2605954450 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cgiar Secretariat

Bibliographic record

VenueCGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) · 2007
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentInternational Development Research CentreArab Fund for Economic and Social DevelopmentW.K. Kellogg FoundationInter-American Development Bank
KeywordsChinaAgricultureSustainable agricultureSustainabilityPolitical scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Less is more 30Rice farmers in Hubei Province discover, much to their surprise, that a new method of irrigation called alternate wetting and drying saves them water, labor, time and money, while boosting crop yield and profitability Material improvement: 35 Conserving and using crop and livestock genetic resources After the flood 36As burgeoning demand for water strains supplies across China, especially in the north, rice scientists work with farmers to refine aerobic rice, an emerging technology for continued bountiful rice harvests from dry land Liang Guangrun grows sweetpotato and maize for fattening pigs for market, as well as peanuts and rice for home consumption.Li Zhenghong, technical advisor for China's only pigeonpea association, holds an immature pod of tamarind, which farmers often interplant with pigeonpea. ICRISAT is the CGIAR Center in this research partnership.Peanut farmer Yu Meilian and her husband, Zheng Dechao, credit training from agricultural extensionists and improved varieties for their improved self-sufficiency.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research)Same topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207