MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810060997 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2018.06.057

An open-access dataset of crop production by farm size from agricultural censuses and surveys

2018· article· en· W2810060997 on OpenAlexafffund
Vincent Ricciardi, Navin Ramankutty, Zia Mehrabi, Larissa Jarvis, Brenton Chookolingo

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAgricultureCensusHarmonizationSample size determinationAgricultural productivityCropAgricultural economicsProduction (economics)GeographyAgricultural scienceStatisticsEnvironmental scienceMathematicsPopulationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset is a cross-country convenience sample of primary data measuring crop production and/or area by farm size for 55 countries that underlies the article entitled "How much of the world׳s food do smallholders produce?" (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2018.05.002). The harmonized dataset is nationally representative with subnational resolution, sourced from agricultural censuses and household surveys. The dataset covers 154 crop species and 11 farm size classes, and is ontologically interoperable with other global agricultural datasets, such as the Food and Agricultural Organization׳s statistical database (FAOSTAT), and the World Census of Agriculture (WCA). The dataset includes estimates of the quantity of food, feed, processed agricultural commodities, seed, waste (post-harvest loss), or other uses; and potential human nutrition (i.e., kilocalories, fats, and proteins) generated by each farm size class. We explain the details of the dataset, the inclusion criteria used to assess each data source, the data harmonization procedures, and the spatial coverage. We detail assumptions underlying the construction of this dataset, including the use of aggregate field size as a proxy for farm size in some cases, and crop species omission biases resulting from converting local species names to harmonized names. We also provide bias estimates for commonly used methods for estimating food production by farm size: use of constant yields across farm size classes when crop production is not available, and relying on nationally representative household sample surveys that omitted non-family farms. Together this dataset represents the most complete empirically grounded estimate of how much food and nutrition smallholder farmers produce from crops.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.027

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations28
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207