Cotton stalk griding scopus-based biblometric analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
\nHarvesting of cotton stalks from harvested fields is a major concern in agriculture around the world. The purpose of the study is to describe and quantify the scientific results of cotton stalk harvesting in the world using bibliometric analysis. The Scopus database search engine was used to retrieve data available from 1983 to August 2023. A total of 96 published papers related to cotton stalk milling were identified. Most of the papers were published as original research articles and English was the main publication language. In the period from 1983 to 2023, the results of the study of the total number of articles in the Scopus database show that the growth trend corresponds to the year 2023, when the articles were published the most in this year. The top 13 countries in absolute research output (number of publications) on this topic are China (59); Egypt (8); Turkey; (5); India (4); Australia (3); Greece (3); Israel (3); America (3); Brazil (2); Canada (2); Kazakhstan (2); Pakistan (2); and Uzbekistan (2).\n
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.095 | 0.100 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".