MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237762131 · doi:10.1079/cabicomm-25-8082

Mobile services: bridging the agricultural knowledge gap

2019· report· en· W4237762131 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Charlotte Day

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMinistry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of ChinaDepartment for International DevelopmentGovernment of the United Kingdom
KeywordsBridging (networking)AgricultureBusinessComputer scienceKnowledge managementGeographyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One in three people in the developing world suffer from 'hidden hunger', or micronutrient deficiency, due to a lack of information on proper nutrition.This is a major cause of illness, poor growth, reduced productivity and impaired cognitive development.To help combat the problem, CABI and its partners developed content for multiple mobile-phone based messaging services during a three year mNutrition initiative, which aimed to increase knowledge of nutrition, health and agriculture in 12 countries across Africa and Asia.As lessons were learnt about content management processes, content was also delivered to millions of farmers through Mobile Network Operator (MNO)-led, content driven services, delivering agriculture or health information.This case study presents lessons from all 12 countries and results of an impact assessment carried out by GSMA for six agriculture Value Added Services (VAS). Key highlights• Localised content created in 12 countries.• Content available in 24 local languages.• Freely accessible Nutrition Knowledge Bank.• Over 12,000 messages produced.• Over 1,500 factsheets produced.• 12 local partners trained in quality content development.• Services developed under mNutrition's mAgri component cumulatively reached more than 5 million registered users worldwide.• Over 1.5 million mAgri users made changes to their behaviour, of which 36% made on-farm changes, including planting, land management, and harvest and storage practices.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207