Качество зерна коллекционных образцов овса
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Grain quality of 27 samples of hulled oats varieties and 6 samples of naked oats have been studied. On the average, for the three-year research work (2010 2012) the following results have been obtained: the largest grain among the hulled oats varieties was produced by Irtysh-23, Tarski-2 and Cocer 60-159, and among naked ones the Q 504 5 oats variety. The best grain characters had the Pinnacle, Megion and Paul oats varieties. The samples of Quoll and Pinnacle varieties were characterized by low grain huskiness. By groats yield the IL 85 1538 and Paul varieties had advantage. Large linear dimensions of grains had the Irtysh and Ural 15 (length) varieties, Irtysh-23 and Phobos (width, thickness). The Irtysh-23, Irtysh-22 and Siberian naked oats varieties of the SRIA selection were noted by the protein yield per hectare of crop. High stability of quality indices over the years of annual yields studies was observed for the following oats varieties: by the 1000 grain weight Irtysh-23 and Tara 2 (SRIA), Cocer 60 159 (U.S.), Q 504 5 (Canada); by nature-Megion (SRIA, North. Zauralye RIA), Pinnacle (USA), Paul (Canada); by protein content IL 86 5698 and Cocer 60 159 (U.S.), Tibor (Canada); by groats yield IL 85 1538 (USA), Pluton (Chile), Paul (Canada); by grain yield Irtysh-21, Irtysh 23 and Siberian naked varieties (SRIA). By combining high productivity and decent quality indicators (weight of 1000 grains, nature, protein content) the Irtysh-23 and Irtysh-22 (SRIA) varieties were distinguished.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".