MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406038431 · doi:10.5376/be.2024.14.0028

High Yield Strategies in Rice Cultivation: Agronomic Practices and Innovations

2024· article· en· W4406038431 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Evidence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRice Cultivation and Yield Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYield (engineering)AgronomyBusinessAgroforestryAgricultural scienceAgricultural engineeringBiologyEngineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides an in-depth analysis of the application of advanced technologies such as optimized planting techniques, water management, nutrient application, integrated pest management (IPM), and precision agriculture. The results show that direct seeding, intermittent irrigation (AWD), balanced fertilization and the use of disease-resistant varieties can significantly increase yields and promote sustainable agricultural development. Innovations such as drone monitoring, remote sensing tools, and biofortified rice varieties can also help increase productivity and enhance resilience to climate change. This study aims to explore effective agronomic practices and the latest innovations to improve rice yield and productivity, highlighting how combining agronomic best practices with technological innovations not only ensures higher productivity, but also supports long-term environmental sustainability and food security.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.169 · 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