MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217555177 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.160614

Land Suitability Assessment for Cassava var. Jarak Towo, Using Determinant Factors as the Strategy Fundament in Hilly Area Jatiyoso-Indonesia

2021· article· en· W3217555177 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mujiyo Mujiyo, Ikhsan Faturahman Suprapto, Aktavia Herawati, Hery Widijanto, Heru Irianto, Erlyna Wida Riptanti, Aulia Qonita

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood and Agricultural Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Sebelas Maret
KeywordsAltitude (triangle)Environmental scienceSowingSampling (signal processing)Land useNonprobability samplingGeographyForestryAgroforestryMathematicsAgronomyEcologyBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing demand for various creative food industries requires cassava raw material supply which has quality and quantity. This research purpose is to identify land suitability, determining the factors, and the strategy of land management for Jarak Towo production in Jatiyoso District. This research using survey method with the land unit based on altitude as observation design which divided into six, namely 400 masl, 600 masl, 800 masl, 1000 masl, 1200 masl, and 1400 masl, and the sampling point is determined by purposive sampling which each land unit has four repetitions and obtain 24 sample points. The land suitability class assessment was carried out by matching the observation data with cassava-modified growth requirements for the Jarak Towo variety. The results in the area were classified into two classes, namely marginally suitable and not suitable. The land suitability determinant factors were temperature, organic carbon, Total-N, and slope. Land units 3 and 4 are land units which land suitability class can increase if these two locations are used as places for planting cassava var. Jarak Towo with the direction of land management strategies that have been given.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicFood and Agricultural SciencesFrench-language works237,207