MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758965945 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v10n5p44

Clean Cane Production Techniques and Environmental Sustainablility: A Review

2017· review· en· W2758965945 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mishelle Doorasamy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSugarcane Cultivation and Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaneProduction (economics)Sugar caneNatural resource economicsBusinessQuality (philosophy)AgricultureWork (physics)RevenueEnvironmental scienceEconomicsGeographyEngineeringSugarAgricultural scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the importance of sugar to humanity, clean cane production has become a source of concern for both academic and producers alike. Focusing on the largest producing and exporting countries of processed and refined sugarcane is the most appropriate means of understanding the concepts evolving around clean cane production. Climate change has not directly reduced the quantity of clean cane produced due to an increase in use of chemical products in farming for sugar cane, but has negatively affected the quality of output. Disease prevalence in harvested cane as well as high soil erosion from global warming have been key elements of the sudden decline in quality cane harvesting and processing. This decline in quality has not only reduce the amount of revenue accruable to farmers but with the consequence of future production prospect if improperly addressed. This study carried out a desk research methodology to review extant literature to identify contemporary issues that needs to be urgently researched on. While a number of issues were uncovered by this study, it was found that scientific experiments and mathematical models enhance theoretical facts on successful and disease free clean cane production methods. But due to the practicability exceptions and the inherent limitations in outcomes of experiments, the research stresses on the importance of field work through observations before theoretical assessments on the findings and the causes of disease prevalence and quality decline in output. This is hoped will sanitize the cane production process and output for the present and future generations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicSugarcane Cultivation and ProcessingFrench-language works237,207