MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7131308090 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18761272

Precision Agriculture Techniques in Drought-Prone Northern Nigerian Villages: An Evaluation of Experimental Design and Implementation

2002· article· en· W7131308090 on OpenAlexaff
Enoch Obiora, Obioma Ayeluwa, Chinedu Uzombi, Ifeyinfa Ezemua

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgriculturePrecision agricultureScarcityWater scarcityYield (engineering)Crop yield

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drought is a significant challenge for agriculture in northern Nigerian villages, where climate variability exacerbates water scarcity and crop yield fluctuations. A systematic review approach was employed to identify, synthesize, and analyse studies on precision agriculture technologies used in northern Nigerian villages affected by drought. The search included databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Precision agriculture techniques showed a mean increase of 15% in crop yield across the reviewed studies compared to conventional farming methods under drought conditions. The experimental designs evaluated in this review generally demonstrated effectiveness but varied significantly in terms of implementation challenges and sustainability. Future research should focus on assessing long-term impacts, scalability, and economic feasibility of precision agriculture solutions in northern Nigerian villages. Model estimation used $\hat{\theta}=argmin_{\theta}\sum_i\ell(y_i,f_\theta(x_i))+\lambda\lVert\theta\rVert_2^2$, with performance evaluated using out-of-sample error.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicRemote Sensing in Agriculture→French-language works237,207→