MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186632583 · doi:10.5539/jas.v13n8p31

Effects of the Adoption of Technology Combinations Beyond Standardized Systems on the Income of Chinese Tobacco Farmers

2021· article· en· W3186632583 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Li Yu, Yongjun Hua, Zhiyong Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCultivation of tobaccoBusinessAgricultureAgricultural economicsMarketingAgricultural machineryMicrodata (statistics)Agricultural scienceEconomicsGeographyEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the microdata for tobacco farmer households in Chongqing, China, this article analyses the determinants of adopting additional multiple agricultural technologies and their impact on income based on implementing a standardized technology system by a tobacco company. In this paper, selection bias from the observed and unobserved heterogeneity was corrected using a multinomial endogenous treatment effects model, and the endogenous properties were eliminated. The empirical results show that the adoption of a variety of additional agricultural technologies was determined by famer’s education level, years of tobacco planting, household size, number of technical training sessions, distance from farmer’s family to the nearest tobacco technology extension station, distance from farmer’s family to the nearest township, proportion of land suitable for machine farming, proportion of leased land. Different from empirical judgment, integrated pest management and balanced fertilization are the most effective additional technology combination strategies for increasing farmers’ income instead of combining all additional comprehensive technologies. The research results suggest that Chongqing Tobacco Company should further strengthen the training of tobacco farmers and guide tobacco farmers to take appropriate pesticide and fertilizer input beyond the standardized technical system, especially for those tobacco farmers far away from the tobacco technology extension station.

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)0.003
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207