MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413827914 · doi:10.1080/23311932.2025.2548612

Analysis of nutritional value, global trade standing, and production-price relationship of green lentils: evidence from Türkiye (Turkey)

2025· article· en· W4413827914 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nizamettin Erbaş

Bibliographic record

VenueCogent Food & Agriculture · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Value (mathematics)EconomicsAgricultural economicsAgricultural scienceBusinessMathematicsBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was designed to reveal the nutritional importance and global trade standing of green lentils, and to analyze the correlation between production and price. The data of the research was obtained from the Turkish Republic Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, the Turkish Grain Board, the Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT), and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The production function was determined using annual time-series. Lentil prices were the independent variable, and the lentil production amount was the dependent variable. Canada ranked 1st in global lentil production with a share of 34.6%, while Australia ranked 1st in global lentil exports with a share of 35.4%. Since agricultural production is greatly affected by the lagged values of the prices, the Koyck model was used as the model in the study. Green lentil production is affected by 3-year prices at most backward. There was a very strong correlation (0.837) between the variables. This study is important in terms of drawing attention to the nutritional and commercial importance of lentils and revealing producers’ sensitivity to prices. In this study, green lentil from legumes was examined; however, studies which the entire legume family can also be conducted.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCogent Food & AgricultureSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207