MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775323298 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n1p225

Gompertz and Logistic Models to the Productive Traits of Sunn Hemp

2017· article· en· W2775323298 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Management and Crop Yield
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do SulConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsGompertz functionSowingAkaike information criterionMathematicsDry matterConfidence intervalShootStatisticsStandard errorStandard deviationCoefficient of determinationHorticultureAgronomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies on growth models for productive character of sunn hemp are important to know the behavior of the culture. Therefore, the objective of this research was to adjust non-linear models, Gompertz and Logistic, in the description of productive traits of sunn hemp in two sowing periods. Two uniformity trials were performed. The evaluations began on October the 29th 2014 and December the 16th 2014, totaling 94 and 76 evaluation days for periods 1 and 2, respectively. After the emergence of the seeds of sunn hemp, for first period from 7 days after sowing, and from 2 to 13 days after sowing, on each day, they were collected randomly four plants. The traits: fresh matter leaf, stem, root, shoot, and total, and dry matter leaf, stem, root, shoot, and total. For both models the confidence interval was calculated of parameters a, b and c. The adjustment quality of the Gompertz and Logistic models was verified by the determination coefficient, the Akaike information criteria, residual standard deviation, mean absolute deviation, mean absolute percentage error and mean prediction error. The Gompertz model when compared between the sowing periods through the confidence interval of the parameters, for the productive traits, differs. The same result was found for the Logistic model. The growth models of Gompertz and Logistic presented good adjustment quality.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.254
Teacher spread0.192 · 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