MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096918072

Prairie Soils & Crops Journal

2015· article· en· W7096918072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArable landHectareSoil conservationSoil qualitySoil governanceSustainabilityLand usePopulationDominance (genetics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil is, without question, critical to the world, supplying virtually all the food and fibre that sustain the human population, and providing ecosystem services that support life. The world’s arable land at 1.35 billion hectares seems vast, but is only 0.20 hectare per person, not evenly distributed. Africa and Asia, for example, have 46 % of the arable land and 71 % of the population and a dominance of low quality land with weathered and infertile soils. The world’s more developed countries in North America and Europe not only have more land per person, but higher quality land and more resources for soil conservation. Conservation is essential with all lands. Despite much progress with modern practices such as conservation tillage, the problem of land degradation is serious particularly in areas with fragile, low quality lands. The Prairies of western Canada are blessed with a huge area of arable soils mostly of good quality. Similar to the world, all soils require good management to remain productive over the long term. Ten million hectares of Prairie soils are considered at risk in terms of both environmental and economic sustainability and require a continuing conservation effort and improved fertilizer management to remain productive.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1450.041

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207