Cover Crop Chart (version 2.0): Helping producers choose cover crops in crop and forage production systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
the cover crop chart v 2 0 is designed to assist producers with decisions on the use of cover crops in crop and forage production systems the chart patterned after the periodic table of elements includes information on 58 crop species that may be planted individually or in cocktail mixtures information on growth cycle relative water use plant architecture seeding depth forage quality pollination characteristics and nutrient cycling are included for most crop species the cover crop chart is easy to use requiring only adobe acrobat software using the chart as a guide users can select individual crop species by clicking on the name which will direct them to additional information about the selected crop icons within each crop page return the user to the chart thereby easily allowing comparisons of different crops the cover crop chart represents a compendium of information from multiple sources throughout the u s and canada and is not based on research conducted at the usda ars northern great plains research laboratory ngprl primary sources of information included the midwest cover crops council usda sustainable agriculture research education sare usda natural resources conservation service nrcs plants database relevant peer reviewed journal articles and the 3rd edition of managing cover crops profitably andy clark editor information on specific crops is occasionally generalized and or approximate to accommodate wide variation in geographic agronomic conditions and therefore may not reflect performance in on farm conditions accordingly usda agricultural research service ars makes no guarantee to the performance of specific crops based on information provided within the cover crop chart the cover crop chart is produced and distributed by the staff of the usda ars ngprl mandan nd mark liebig and holly johnson contributed to the design and content of the chart with input from ngprl staff and producers and technicians from the area iv soil conservation districts of north dakota and nrcs staff at the bismarck and dickinson field area offices
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".