Applications of Geosynthetics to Irrigation, Drainage and Agriculture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Geosynthetics are man‐made products manufactured to meet specific functions in earthworks and geotechnical projects, such as dams, levees, canals, dikes and other structures commonly found in agricultural engineering. Thanks to the Memorandum of Understanding between the International Geosynthetics Society (IGS) and the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID), collaborative efforts are being undertaken to generate awareness of geosynthetics in agriculture. In the Workshop on ‘Applications of geosynthetics to irrigation, drainage and agriculture’ held at the 23rd International Congress of the ICID in Mexico City on 8 October 2017, a group of delegates from the IGS contributed with a series of presentations introducing various functions and applications of geosynthetics. The authors gave an overview of how geosynthetic products are designed and tested to ensure they will fulfil their intended function, focusing on applications to irrigation, drainage and agriculture. A few key considerations were identified as being critical to ensure proper performance of geosynthetic materials, in geotechnical projects in general and in agriculture in particular. The present paper is intended to provide a summary of these presentations. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".