Actieagenda voor verbeterde kennisdoorstroming in de Nederlandse Tuinbouw
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Het Nederlandse Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System (AKIS) is sterk ontwikkeld, maar ook versnipperd. Er zijn veel partijen die parallel in het kennissysteem opereren met geen of beperkte coördinatie op sector, regionaal of landelijk niveau. Het gevolg is dat effectieve doorstroming van kennis gelimiteerd kan zijn. Kennis en innovatie zijn belangrijk in het (verder) verduurzamen van de Nederlandse land- en tuinbouw, daarom is het van belang dat de Nederlandse AKIS versterkt wordt en kennisdoorstroming wordt verbeterd. Op basis van een enquête, interactieve sessies en resultaten uit het EU project NEFERTITI is in deze studie een overzicht gemaakt van belangrijke barrières die kennisdoorstroming in de AKIS van de Nederlandse tuinbouw belemmeren en worden vervolgens aanbevelingen gedaan om gezamenlijk in actie te komen om deze kennisdoorstroming te verbeteren.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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.
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".