MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097828594

Editor

2014· article· en· W7097828594 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to elevated CO2
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOzoneAtmosphere (unit)Greenhouse gasOzone layerDamagesGreenhouse effectAgricultureMontreal Protocol
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ozone in the lower atmosphere causes damage to plants and affects human health. It also contributes to the greenhouse effect and damages materials. These problems are a major con-sideration in current European negotiations on transboundary air pollution. Ground-level ozone is formed from nitrogen oxides and hydro-carbons under the influence of sunlight. Transport is the single most important source of these pollutants, although energy production and various types of industry also account for signifi-cant emissions. Concentrations of ground-level ozone have risen substantially in the course of the 20th century. In addition, ozone ‘episodes ’ – short periods in which ozone levels are greatly increased – sometimes occur, chiefly in the spring and summer. This report describes the mechanisms of ozone formation, current levels of ozone in Sweden, and national and international environmental objectives relating to ground-level ozone. The emphasis is on ozone’s effects on plants. On the basis of a wide range of experiments carried out in Sweden over the last 15 years, the report describes how ozone affects agricultural crops, forest trees and wild plants. isbn 91-620-4970-4 issn 0282-7298

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4060.254

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant responses to elevated CO2French-language works237,207