MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4200276168 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2021-0158

AAC Perform red spring wheat

2021· article· en· W4200276168 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Harpinder Randhawa, P. D. Brown, J. Mitchell Fetch, Raman Dhariwal, T. Fetch, Brent McCallum, María Antonia Henríquez, Reem Aboukhaddour

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest weightCultivarSpring (device)Grain yieldRust (programming language)AgronomyStem rustStrawYield (engineering)MathematicsHorticultureBiologyComputer scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AAC Perform, an awned hard red spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivar, combines high grain yield and good agronomic characteristics with excellent resistance to leaf, stem, and stripe rust. Based on 43 station years of registration trial data from 2017 to 2019, the grain yield of AAC Perform was about 6% higher than AAC Foray and about 12% over AAC Penhold. AAC Perform was significantly shorter than AAC Foray and had straw strength similar to AAC Penhold. It was about two days later maturing than AAC Foray. AAC Perform had similar test weight, smaller kernel size and lower protein concentration as compared with AAC Foray. AAC Perform had milling and baking quality suitable for grades of the Canada Prairie Spring Red wheat market class.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology→French-language works237,207→