MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783864532 · doi:10.22256/pubvet.v12n2a28.1-9

Potencial da ensilagem de capim-braquiaria com inclusão de farelo de arroz: Revisão

2018· article· en· W2783864532 on OpenAlexaff
Bruno Borges, Fagton de Mattos Negrão, Alayzza Machado, Flávio Henrique Bravim Caldeira, Anderson de Moura Zanine, Túlio Otávio Jardim D’Almeida Lins

Bibliographic record

VenuePubVet · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRural Development and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilageForageFermentationNutrientEffluentBiologyAgronomyLivestockEnvironmental scienceAgricultural scienceMathematicsBiotechnologyFood scienceEnvironmental engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brazil is one of the countries with the highest potential for livestock production, mainly determined by its climatic conditions, vast territory and forage, that are the basis of the diet of ruminants in most production systems in the country. This assumption, an alternative to solve the lack of food during the year is the conservation of surplus grass as silage. However, the high moisture content at the ensilage predispose the growth of undesirable microorganisms, which result in loss of gases and effluents. However, one of the ways to reduce these losses is the addition of coproduct with high hygroscopic and increase the nutritional value and benefits during the fermentation process of preserving forage. Developed this study aiming to evaluate the fermentation characteristics, gas losses and effluent, nutrient recovery, nutritive value, the in situ degradability and fractionation of carbohydrates and protein in silages added hygroscopic additive, as rice meal.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubVetSame topicRural Development and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207