MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157976011 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.8784

6. Organic and Conventional Agriculture: Assessing Synergies Between Agricultural Approaches

2016· article· en· W3157976011 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Susan Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureOrganic farmingBusinessPopulationClimate changeNatural resource economicsEnvironmental impact of agricultureYield (engineering)Environmental scienceAgricultural economicsEconomicsGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organic agriculture (OA) and conventional agriculture (CA) represent two polar approaches to farming, both of which hold their own challenges and implications with the impending global food crisis. One of Canada’s major exports include crops, and yet globalization coupled with climate change present pressing agricultural issues leading us to ask how our farming methods will adapt to feed the world’s burgeoning population. An approach to finding a solution can come from setting aside the principles and biases defining organic and conventional farming to find a combinatory approach to farming, assuming that they are not so dichotomous they can be combined. A survey of three major Canadian crops (wheat, corn, canola) and agricultural variables relevant to food production and climate change (crop yield, emissions, energy usage, and application of fertilizer) in OA and GA will lay out a spectrum upon which an optimized combined approach to farming can be sought. Ultimately, this project aims to reconcile OA and GA farming practices in the best interests of human well-being and the environment when considering the predicted global food crisis from a Canadian perspective.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicOrganic Food and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207