MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2745472951 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2017.13.70

Study on Cultivators Associating Post Harvest Losses of Onion Vegetable in Sindh’s Mirpurkhas District

2017· article· en· W2745472951 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shakeel Hussain Chattha, Benish Nawaz Mirani, Shakeel Ahmed Soomro, Khalil Ahmed Ibupoto, Irfan Ahmed Shaikh, H. R. Mangio, Ghulam Mujtaba Khushk, Imtiaz Ali Dahri, Abid Ali Abro, Zahееr Ahmеd Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCropAgricultural scienceToxicologyBusinessNon-invasive ventilationForensic scienceMathematicsBiotechnologyAgroforestryAgronomyMedicineBiologyVeterinary medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was carried out in Mirpurkhas District of Sindh Province during the year 2015-16, aiming to observe post-harvest losses of onions associated with the cultivators. Following the random sampling 60 respondents were selected from 12 villages of 06 Talukas in the District. Interviews were conducted for the collection of data. Problems expressed were as; high cost of fertilizers (93.33%), high cost of pesticides (93.33%), hand weeding is labour consuming and expensive (91.66%), labour problems during harvesting (85%), ineffective and costly weedicides (80%), lack of knowledge about recommended fertilizers doses for onion crop (80%) and lack of knowledge about improved varieties (68.33%). The problems in marketing of onion include lack of remunerative price (96.66%), fluctuation in market price (93.33%) and high charges of transportation (20%). The present study suggested that training/ awareness programs should be conducted for cultivators regarding establishing technical storage and handling onion problems.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicAgricultural Economics and PracticesFrench-language works237,207