MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7118095653 · doi:10.71318/apom.2005.59.3.161

A Comparison of Table Grape Selections Bred atSummerland, British Columbia

2005· article· W7118095653 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew G. Reynolds, D.A. Wardle, M. Bouthillier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American Pomological Society · 2005
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTable grapeTable (database)CultivarWhite (mutation)Agricultural experiment station

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several crosses were made between 1977 and 1980 at the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Center, Summerland, British Columbia to fulfill demand for reliably winter-hardy, high-quality table grapes. By 1986, at least nine were identified as being superior and worthy of second test status. Five of these were white seedless types [Selections 433, 495 ('Skookum Seedless'), 497, 535 ('Sooke Seedless'), 537); also selected were one seedless pink (Selection 434), one seeded white (Selection 494) and one seeded pink (Selection 651). In many cases, these selections proved equal or superior to standard cultivars to which they were compared; these were: 'Himrod', 'Interlaken', 'Lakemont', and 'Romulus' (white seedless); 'Einset Seedless' (pink seedless); 'Seneca' (seeded white), and; 'Festivee' (pink seeded).

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.498
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American Pomological SocietySame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207