вast crops in russia and abroad: the state, problems and prospects of their processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Представлен анализ состояния, проблем и перспектив производства и переработки лубяных культур в России и зарубежных странах, используя многолетние собственные и другие исследования. Показано, что: с 2010 года площади посева лубяных культур в РФ увеличивались, но при этом, она, входя в тройку лидеров по производству льняных тканей, пока отстает от зарубежных стран по темпам роста первичной и глубокой переработки, по-прежнему остается проблема покупки нового технологического оборудования силами льнопенькозаводов. Основными производителями лубяных культур являются СНГ, Аргентина, Канада, США, Индия, Чехия, Германия, Франция, Бельгия, Голландия, Казахстан и другие. Определены в РФ: основные регионы возделывания лубяных культур; динамика роста цен на технологическое оборудование и волокно первичной переработки; состав и цены различных линий их первичной переработки; мировые производители льняных тканей. Сформулированы причины, тормозящие эффективность первичной и глубокой переработки лубяных культур в РФ. The analysis of the state, problems and prospects of production and processing of bast crops in Russia and foreign countries is presented, using many years of own and other research. It is shown that: since 2010, the area of sowing of bast crops in the Russian Federation has increased, but at the same time, it is one of the three leaders in the production of linen fabrics, while it lags behind foreign countries in terms of growth rates of primary and deep processing, there is still a problem of buying new technological equipment by 31 flax mills. The main producers of bast crops are the CIS, Argentina, Canada, the USA, India, the Czech Republic, Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Kazakhstan and others. The following are defined in the Russian Federation: the main regions of cultivation of bast crops; the dynamics of price growth for technological equipment and fiber of primary processing; the composition and prices of various lines of their primary processing; world manufacturers of linen fabrics. The reasons hindering the effectiveness of primary and deep processing of bast crops in the Russian Federation are formulated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".