MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165523341 · doi:10.1111/wre.12480

The critical period for weed seed control: A proposed framework to limit weed seed return

2021· article· en· W3165523341 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWeed Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWestern Grains Research Foundation
KeywordsWeedWeed controlLimitingAgronomyBiologyPhenologyGrowing seasonLimit (mathematics)MathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Proliferation of herbicide‐resistant weeds demands re‐evaluation of fundamental weed control objectives. Yield loss mitigation remains a priority, but limiting weed seed return (WSR) to the soil seedbank is key to preventing herbicide‐resistant annual weeds from multiplying. The critical period for weed seed control (CPWSC) is the period of the growing season during which weed control can minimise weed seed production. The CPWSC provides a framework to limit WSR by targeting weeds during phenological stages critical for seed development. We aim to (a) introduce the CPWSC concept, (b) provide an example using Bassia scoparia as a model species and (c) offer a framework for future research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.296 · 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