Effectiveness of Facebook groups in enhancing the capacity of rooftop gardeners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rooftop farming is a modern way of growing food in cities that uses unused rooftop spaces to promote local food production. A lack of knowledge and limited access to technical assistance are major obstacles that hinder the practice. Furthermore, traditional agricultural extension services currently provide insufficient incentives to encourage this practice. These limitations, however, can be addressed by providing real‐time information and support through social media platforms such as Facebook. This study investigates the extent to which Facebook supports the information needs of rooftop gardeners within the framework of virtual communities of practice. It also seeks to assess the perceived usefulness of information shared in Facebook groups for enhancing the capacity of rooftop gardeners. Data were collected from 120 rooftop gardeners in Bangladesh through an online survey administered via Google Forms and distributed across two popular Facebook groups. Findings indicate that information sharing in Facebook groups assists rooftop gardeners in planning, acquiring, and utilizing resources, carrying out intercultural operations, and determining optimal harvesting and storage practices. Overall, Facebook can play a significant role in bridging the information gap among rooftop gardeners and in enhancing their skills. Moreover, it represents a valuable resource for urban dwellers interested in engaging in rooftop gardening.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".