MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784716343 · doi:10.1149/ma2018-01/26/1574

(Invited) Plant Wearable for Enhanced Agricultural Productivity

2018· article· en· W2784716343 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna M. Nassar, Sherjeel M. Khan, Maha Nour, Amani Saleh Almuslem, Muhammad M. Hussain

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigitizationWearable computerProductivityAgricultureAgricultural engineeringPopulationComputer scienceAgricultural productivityAnalyticsEnvironmental scienceEngineeringData scienceTelecommunicationsEcologyEconomicsEmbedded systemBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increased global population, it is important to ensure their basic need: food. While eighty percent of the world's population depend on five agricultural products: rice, wheat, corn, barley, sugar cane, only in 20% areas they can be grown. Often, due to uncertain climatic condition, soil condition, excessive rain, and other natural uncertainties, the agricultural productivity is compromised and often not optimally controlled. Although, with digitization, this unfortunate situation is changing, due to high price, need for constant seamless connectivity and precision and fast data analytics, such digitization is not proliferating at the rate it is required. Finally, naturally most plants have different "skins", shapes, sizes and sensitivities. Here we show, low-cost, standalone, seamlessly connected plant wearable which can conform to sensitive plant sides and can monitor the surrounding micro-climate and plants botanical condition. We use heterogeneous integration of hybrid materials, devices and processes to achieve such ultra-light weight and low-cost disposable systems which potentially change our perspective about traditional ICs and their integration in our daily life. Figure 1

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207