MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408240578 · doi:10.5376/bm.2025.16.0004

Adaptability of Drill Seeding and Broadcast Seeding in Rice-Wheat Rotation Systems

2025· article· en· W4408240578 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

VenueBioscience Methods · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRice Cultivation and Yield Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeedingAdaptabilityDrillAgronomyRotation (mathematics)MathematicsBiologyEngineeringGeometryMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated the compatibility and effectiveness of drill seeding and broadcast seeding in rice-wheat rotation systems, comparing their impacts on crop yield, resource use efficiency, and environmental sustainability. The results indicated that drill seeding, implemented through mechanized seed drills, significantly enhanced productivity, reduced labor requirements, and improved water and nitrogen use efficiency. In contrast, broadcast seeding, while simpler and requiring lower initial costs, generally demanded higher seeding rates and resulted in uneven seed distribution, leading to lower resource use efficiency. The study also highlighted key challenges such as weed management, residue handling, and socio-economic barriers. Future research should focus on improving mechanized technologies, enhancing environmental adaptability, and addressing socio-economic constraints. This study aims to provide scientific evidence for the long-term sustainable development of rice-wheat rotation systems.

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)0.002
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 score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.292 · 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