MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975563189 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n17p287

Legislation of Pesticides in Citriculture, Community of Cubiteua, Capitão Poço/PA

2019· article· en· W2975563189 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mayra Taniely Ribeiro Abade, Maria Eunice Lima Rocha, J. A. M. Siqueira, Robson Christie Lacerda Siqueira, Fernanda Ludmyla Barbosa de Souza, Lúcio Cunha, Luane Laíse Oliveira Ribeiro, M. S. Ribeiro, Martín Avila, K. C. Millomes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationDecreeOrange (colour)LawBusinessAgricultural scienceAgricultural economicsGeographyEnvironmental protectionToxicologyPolitical scienceEconomicsEnvironmental scienceHorticultureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Brazilian citriculture presents hegemony in the production and export of orange juice. The state of São Paulo is the largest national producer, accounting for 74% of the national production of this fruit. The State of Pará is responsible for 1.02% of the production of Orange in Brazil, of that amount the municipality of Captain Poço is responsible for 57% of the total produced. The objective of this research was to analyze the profile of different producers in compliance with the pesticide legislation. For the development of the work, a survey was carried out based on the Law of Agrochemicals—Law No. 7,802 of July 11, 1989 and the Law of Packaging—Law No. 9,974 of June 6, 2000, in the community of Cubiteua belonging to the municipality of Captain Poço/PA. The producers interviewed were chosen based on planted area and these were typified according to the amount of citrus planted. The percentage of respondents who know Federal Law 7,802/89, rectified by Law 9,974/00 and regulated by Decree No. 4,074/02, is equal to 8%. Both laws are not known to most producers, especially those with the smallest planted area, and as a consequence, they are not being met, leading to environmental, social, economic and human health problems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgricultural and Food SciencesFrench-language works237,207