MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905017575 · doi:10.31421/ijhs/12/2/648

Estimation of plum and prune cultivars with morphogenetical traits

2006· article· en· W2905017575 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. Surányi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Horticultural Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCultivarRipeningBiologyHorticulturePollinationBotanyPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author post few years organizes the plum breeding program. He uses up earlier elaborated morphogenetic and productive characteristics and traits, already on such basis their selected 21 cultivars in the pomological garden at Cegléd. The Hungarian plum assortment and offer very specific and tight, thus that they endeavor, that the selection before then flare. There are indicating already only the perspective cultivars in present paper on basis of gathered data one decade underneath. Paralleling control was three type of used (Besztercei szilva Bt. 2, Green gage and Stanley). 12-sort trait according to were compared the cultivars. The productivity-biological standpoints without, the open pollination and pollen germination, over and above that the ripening on date big differences appear. The near future the 'C. 1501' (Yellow Besztercei), 'Ontario' and `Mirabelle de Nancy' (yellow plums), the yes untimely `Precoce di Guigno' (red plum), the very well abundant 'C. 940' and Victoria (lilac plums), over and above that 'Beregi datolya', ‘Révfülöpi’ and `Szarvasi' (blue plums) cultivars setup suggest. The demonstrated cultivars out of further give for deputize value the Precoce di Giugno, as earliest ripening and the 'Beregi datolya' but the at the latest ripening.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Horticultural ScienceSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207