MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3091814244 · doi:10.1038/s41477-020-00783-z

A scoping review of adoption of climate-resilient crops by small-scale producers in low- and middle-income countries

2020· review· en· W3091814244 on OpenAlexaff
Maricelis Acevedo, Kevin V. Pixley, Nkulumo Zinyengere, Sisi Meng, Hale Tufan, Karen A. Cichy, Lívia Bíziková, Krista Isaacs, Kate Ghezzi‐Kopel, Jaron Porciello

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Plants · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsInternational Institute for Sustainable Development
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsLow and middle income countriesScale (ratio)Climate changeNatural resource economicsBusinessAgricultural economicsAgroforestryEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsEnvironmental scienceGeographyDeveloping countryEconomic growthEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.011
Bibliometrics0.0210.022
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations340
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature Plants→Same topicAgricultural risk and resilience→French-language works237,207→