MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4382994549 · doi:10.5455/faa.144546

A comprehensive review of the production technology of Cannabis sativa L. with its current legal status and botanical features

2023· review· en· W4382994549 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shubh Pravat Singh Yadav, Netra Prasad Ghimire, Vivek Lahutiya

Bibliographic record

VenueFundamental and applied agriculture · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabisCannabis sativaCannabidiolCannabinolCuttingBiologyToxicologyBiotechnologyHorticultureMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cannabis sativus L. is an annual, deciduous, dimorphic, flowering plant that is distributed all over the world. Despite its tremendous and handy usage in medicinal and other areas, the cultivation, production, and trade of cannabis are illegal in most of the countries. It is so because of some of its harmful side effects on human health when consumed haphazardly or addictively. Following the declaration made by the UN Assembly, some countries, including the Republic of South Africa, Canada, Germany, Australia, Colombia, and Indonesia, have legalized the indoor cultivation and production of cannabis, as well as cannabis-based products. Cannabis can thrive in a wide range of climatic and ecological conditions. Cannabis can be propagated via seeds, cuttings, grafting, micropropagation, etc. The plants are mainly cultivated for their chemical constituents like tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol, cannabinol, etc., which are extracted from their dried flowers. This study illustrates the production technology, current legal status, and botanical characteristics of Cannabis sativus.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFundamental and applied agriculture→Same topicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research→French-language works237,207→