MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946039409 · doi:10.1002/ppp3.34

Resetting the table for people and plants: Botanic gardens and research organizations collaborate to address food and agricultural plant blindness

2019· article· en· W2946039409 on OpenAlex
Sarada Krishnan, Tara Moreau, Jeff S. Kuehny, Ari Novy, Stephanie L. Greene, Colin K. Khoury

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlants People Planet · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnimal and Plant Science Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureBusinessFood systemsSustainabilityFood securityMarketingPolitical scienceEconomic growthGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Societal Impact Statement Food and agricultural plants are integral to human well‐being. Due to their universal importance, such plants would appear to represent an ideal entryway by which to address plant blindness. However, with limited opportunities for direct contact with agriculture, many people cannot appreciate the flora that feed us every day. We provide examples of informal education initiatives aimed at increasing public awareness and appreciation of food and agricultural plants, made possible through collaborations between botanic gardens, academic institutions, nonprofits, and agricultural research organizations. We hope these examples encourage and inspire organizations to further utilize food and agricultural plants to tackle plant blindness. Summary Of the myriad gifts plants provide to humanity, food is among the most visible, as everyone needs to eat, every single day. Due to their universal importance, food and agricultural plants would appear to represent ideal entryways to address plant blindness. Yet increasing urbanization worldwide and decreasing proportions of the global workforce in agriculture are limiting opportunities for people to have direct, hands‐on experiences with food and agricultural plants outside of retail purchasing, meal preparation, and food consumption. This disconnect is troubling, especially as the challenges to the sustainability of our future food supply necessitate that society, and certainly elected decision‐makers, have the capacity to understand the potential benefits, risks, and tradeoffs inherent to agriculture and its advancing technologies. We outline opportunities to address agricultural plant blindness with emphasis on current complex issues within the food and agriculture sector. We provide examples of fruitful collaborations between botanic gardens, academic institutions, nonprofits, and agricultural research organizations that engage people around these issues.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.278 · 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