CUNIPALM : Evaluation de la durabilité et innovations pour des ateliers CUNIcoles et PALMipèdes gras plus durables,Sustainability assessment and innovations for rabbit and more durable fatty waterfowl workshops : project CUNIPALM.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal production are at the crossroads of new social, economic and environmental issues and sustainable development has become a priority for many years. In this context, the Poultry Technical Institute (ITAVI) and the National Institute for Agronomic Research (INRA) have joined forces in a project combining methodological and experimental approaches with the following objectives: 1) To assess the sustainability of rabbits and waterfowl production units, 2) To propose innovations to improve the sustainability of the livestock systems, 3 ) To validate and communicate the results of the project. These four years of work led to the development of a tool for evaluation of sustainability for rabbit and waterfowls breeding units (DIAMOND method), formalized by the edition of a User Guide, and then declined in a suitable tool for the assessment of innovations in research. The DIAMOND method was built within a participatory approach. The analysis of data from the networks of reference farms give national references concerning environmental, social and economic performance and highlight the influence of farm characteristics and technical choices on sustainability. Seven innovations targeting feeding system, housing, reproduction and genetics were also tested and evaluated for potential gains of sustainability. This work is a valuable asset for the industry as a communication support but also as a strategic analysis to identify the margins of progress and priorities for action.
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 | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".