Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article provides an analysis of soybean varieties, which are listed in the State Register of Plant Varieties suitable for distribution in Ukraine as of 2025. The analysis of soybean varieties by ripeness groups, applicants and years of plants in the register was analyzed. As of 2025, 365 varieties of soybeans were entered in the register of plant varieties of plant varieties suitable for distribution. Early ripening - 134 pcs. or 37.0% of ripe - 58 pcs. or 16.0%, medium -early - 46 pcs. or 13.0%, medium -ripe - 122 pcs. or 33.0%, late ripening - 5 pcs. or 1.0%. In terms of ripeness, the largest number of varieties of soybeans is 37.0%in the early ripening group, in our opinion, this is due to the insignificant duration of the growing season in these varieties, which are guaranteed to ripen in any growing area of Ukraine and the lower parameters of harvesting at the time of harvesting. The largest number of varieties that are listed in the State Register of Plant Varieties suitable for distribution in Ukraine are domestic breeding (UA) - 135 pcs. or 37 %, as well as for Canadian breeding (CA) - 74 pcs, or 20 %, France (FR) - 40 pcs. or 11.0%, Austria (AT) - 33 pcs. or 9.0%, Germany (DE) - 18 pcs., (USA) US - 12 pcs., Italy (IT) - 10 pcs., Poland (PL) - 8 pcs., Hungary (HU) - 8 pcs., Romania (RO) - 7 pcs., Belgium (Be) - 6 pcs. The largest number of varieties of soybeans, which are listed in the State Register of Plant Varieties, have been listed in Ukraine over the last five years from 19 to 57 pcs.In addition, a large number of varieties in the register are presented with varieties that were entered during 2014-2019-32.0%. That is, it should be noted that in Ukraine there are enough varietal resources of soybeans to meet the needs of farms of commodity production of grain, taking into account a sufficient range of soybean varieties for varieties.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".