MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392701407 · doi:10.1080/09614524.2024.2325415

An assessment of capacity building activities for common interest farmer groups in Bangladesh

2024· article· en· W4392701407 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment in Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh
KeywordsCapacity buildingBusinessAgricultureAgricultural extensionResource (disambiguation)Economic growthAgricultural economicsEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines how “farmers from the Common Interest Group (CIG)” have changed their capacity levels due to participating in Bangladesh’s National Agricultural Technology Program (NATP). A mixed-method design was used to collect data from 120 rice and vegetable farmers. Results show that most respondents (above 75 per cent) agree that NATP initiatives, particularly group-based extension services, developed their capacity in different cultivation techniques, resource utilisation, farm inputs, communication behaviour, market access, and involvement in farmer organisations (FOs)/community-based organisations (CBOs). This study concludes that the concept of CIGs should be incorporated into the existing extension system following the termination of donor support.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.284 · 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