MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916639019 · doi:10.18174/429545

Innovatie in de land- en tuinbouw 2016

2017· report· nl· W2916639019 on OpenAlexaff
R.W. van der Meer, M.A. van Galen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagenl
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hoe vernieuwt de Nederlandse land-en tuinbouw?Innovatie en vernieuwing in de Nederlandse landbouw is belangrijk voor de versterking van de concurrentiekracht en het realiseren van beleidsdoelstellingen ten aanzien van duurzaamheid.Het ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (LNV) voert beleid om innovatie en vernieuwing in de land-en tuinbouw te bevorderen.Situatie LNV streefde naar minimaal 10% innoverende bedrijven in de land-en tuinbouw in 2015.De streefwaarde geldt voor het totaal van innoverende bedrijven en vroege volgers.Motieven voor en belemmeringen bij innovaties vaststellen, zodat beleidsmakers daarop kunnen inspelen.Wat is het aandeel vernieuwende bedrijven in de land-en tuinbouw?Welke motieven hebben ondernemers om te vernieuwen?Uitdaging

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.014

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Modeling in Geospatial ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207