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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weed interference is one of the main factors responsible for reducing the productivity of the peanut crop. Among weed control methods, the chemical is considered one of the main tools, however, the herbicides registered for this crop are scarce. The objective of this study was to evaluate the selectivity of herbicides applied in post-emergence in Runner peanut cultivars. For this, an experiment was performed in an 11x5 factorial scheme, meaning 10 herbicides plus one control (without herbicide) and five peanut cultivars, with four replicates. Visual evaluations of phytointoxication were carried out at 7, 14 and 21 days after application of the herbicides. At the end of the experiment, was determined the dry mass of aboveground and root parts. Based on the results obtained, it is concluded that the herbicides 2,4-D (1.50 L ha-1), mesotrione (0.3 L ha-1), saflufenacil (0.75 L ha-1), imazapic (175 g ha-1) and S-metolachlor (1.75 L ha-1) have potential to be used for all the peanut cultivars studied. Herbicides hexazinone (2.50 kg ha-1), amicarbazone (2.00 kg ha-1), tebuthiuron (2.00 L ha-1), clomazone (2.00 L ha-1) and sulfentrazone (1.20 L ha-1) must not be indicated, at these doses, for post-emergence spraying in the evaluated cultivars. The genotypes do not react equally to certain products, therefore, there is a need for further studies the at field conditions to attest the responses obtained in the present study and verify that the yield potential is not affected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it