MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766983891 · doi:10.5539/mas.v11n11p43

Aquaponics – A Process Control Approach

2017· article· en· W2766983891 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noel Scattini, Stanislaw Maj

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInnovations in Aquaponics and Hydroponics Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomationProcess (computing)Computer scienceProcess automation systemProcess controlControl systemControl (management)Instrumentation (computer programming)Systems engineeringProcess engineeringControl engineeringReliability engineeringEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An aquaponics automation design was undertaken to interpret the system requirements to integrate automation to operate and optimize the system. The system was designed to increase the layers of control over the inputs and outputs to operate the system with a process control approach. The viability of these levels of control over the process was investigated by undertaking a processes design to assess types of instrumentation required and control functions that could be incorporated into the design to optimize the process. The design process incorporated sub-systems that did not rely on a main system, to increase ranges of commercially viable crops. The subsystems do not have the same environmental requirements of the main system and the subsystems environment could be calibrated to meet specific requirements of a selected crop including fruiting vegetable types. The results of the automation design have been tabulated into this article to assess the viability of increased levels of process control to obtain subsystem designs with maximized optimization.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicInnovations in Aquaponics and Hydroponics SystemsFrench-language works237,207