MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319831072 · doi:10.19103/as.2022.0110.17

Considerations with selecting turfgrass varieties and cultivars

2023· book-chapter· en· W4319831072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin V. Morris, Yuanshuo Qu, Len Kne, Steve Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueBurleigh Dodds series in agricultural science · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)UploadIrrigationDrought toleranceComputer scienceAgronomyWorld Wide WebBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Turfgrass Evaluation Program (NTEP) conducts trials of turfgrass species across the USA and Canada. NTEP data collected since 1981 is publicly available at www.ntep.org. Data is collected on more than 100 parameters including key factors in sustainable turfgrass selection. Selection of turfgrasses with traits such as improved disease resistance, drought tolerance, persistence under poor soil conditions or low quality irrigation and fast establishment are shown to protect the environment, improve athlete safety, reduce inputs, thus improving sustainability. To improve access to sustainable turfgrass data, NTEP and the University of Minnesota have developed a relational database along with a user-friendly selection tool, the Turfgrass Trial Explorer. This tool is accessed at www.ntep.org/database.htm, which allows for additional selection, sorting, analyzing and downloading of NTEP data. Case studies are presented to demonstrate current and future use of the Turfgrass Trial Explorer for sustainable turfgrass selection.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.013

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBurleigh Dodds series in agricultural scienceSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207