Nonlinear Models for Plant Height of Rye Cultivars at Sowing Times
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adjusting nonlinear Gompertz and Logistic models will help in the understanding of the growth pattern of the rye crop and also in the height response of the plant, when planted in different environmental conditions. The the aims of this study were to adjust the nonlinear Gompertz and Logistic models for plant height and indicate the one that best describes growth of two rye cultivars in five sowing times. Ten uniformity trials were conducted with the rye crop in the 2016 harvest. In each trial, ten randomly selected plants were evaluated from the first expanded leaf weekly. In each plant height was measured. The adjustment of the Gompertz and Logistic models as a function of the accumulated thermal sum was performed with the average plant height at each evaluation. The parameters a, b, and c were estimated for each model. The confidence interval for each parameter and the inflection points, maximum acceleration, maximum deceleration and asymptotic deceleration were calculated. The quality of fit of the models was verified by the coefficient of determination, Akaike's information criterion and residual standard deviation. Intrinsic non-linearity and non-linearity of the parameter effect were quantified. Both models describe satisfactorily the plant height. The model that best describes the growth of rye cultivars is Logistic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".