MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2801067341 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11635

Spatio-temporal patterns of extreme weather events and their impacts on corn (Zea mays) and soybeans (Glycine max) in eastern Ontario

2016· dissertation· en· W2801067341 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anna Zaytseva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsAgricultureGrowing seasonFlooding (psychology)Zea maysExtreme weatherGeographySowingClimate changeCropEnvironmental scienceAgronomyExtreme heatBiologyForestryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme weather events have multiple adverse effects, with sectors like agriculture being particularly vulnerable to their impacts. Changes in weather extremes in eastern Ontario from 1961 to 2010 were investigated by assessing trends in extreme event indicators. In addition to generic and agroclimatic indicators, corn- and soybean-specific indices were developed, accounting for crop tolerances to extremes at different growth stages. A shift to a warmer, wetter climate and increases in accumulated heat units and growing season length were observed. Flooding during soybean planting season and early stages of corn development became more prevalent. Additionally, increases in drought events during critical reproductive stages were recorded for both crops. The most significant changes occurred in areas where key agricultural lands are located. The results of this research will help to identify opportunities and threats to crop production, make informed decisions on modifying agricultural practices and develop tools to support adaptive policy development.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→