MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210280484 · doi:10.5539/sar.v11n1p56

Reviewer Acknowledgements for Sustainable Agriculture Research, Vol. 11, No. 1

2022· article· en· W4210280484 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Agriculture Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgriculturePolitical scienceResearch centerLibrary scienceSustainable agricultureResearch centreAgricultural economicsGeographyAgricultural scienceEconomicsArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable Agriculture Research wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Their help and contributions in maintaining the quality of the journal are greatly appreciated. Sustainable Agriculture Research is recruiting reviewers for the journal. If you are interested in becoming a reviewer, we welcome you to join us. Please contact us for the application form at: sar@ccsenet.org Reviewers for Volume 11, Number 1 Aaron Norris, Texas Tech University, USA Bed Mani Dahal, Kathmandu University, Nepal Darwin Pangaribuan, Lampung University, Indonesia Jiban Shrestha, Nepal Agricultural Research Council, Nepal Katarzyna Panasiewicz, Poznan University of Life Sciences, Poland Luciano Chi, Sugar Industry Research and Development Institute, Belize Manuel Teles Oliveira, University Tras os Montes Alto Douro (UTAD), Portugal Patrice Ngatsi Zemko, University of Yaoundé I, Cameroon Ram Niwas, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, India Roberto José Zoppolo, Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (Uruguay), Uruguay Tenaw Workayehu, Hawassa Research Center, Southern Agricultural Research Institute, Ethiopia Waqar Majeed, University of Agriculture, Pakistan

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable Agriculture ResearchSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207