View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Method / resource observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
The prototype achieved a quality of feed index of 38 to 46%.
Outcomequality of feed index e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “and a quality of feed index of 38 to 46% ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 629–669 t0 “SOYBEANS ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–29 Other claims from this paper (2) Method / resource observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
Quality of Feed Index ranged from 78% to 90%.
OutcomeQuality of Feed Index e0 Verbatim
t0 “Groundnut Planter ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–85 e0 “the Quality of Feed Index ranged from 78% to 90% ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 578–626 Other claims from this paper (9) Association observed original result significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Soil tillage systems significantly affected the quality of feed index and multiple index values.
TreatmentSoil tillage systems e1 Outcomequality of feed index and multiple index values e1 Not reported Taxon Direction
Verbatim
e1 “Soil tillage systems significantly affected the quality of feed index and multiple index values at P ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 666–766 Other claims from this paper (2) Method / resource observed original result significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Miss index , multiple index and quality of feed index differed significantly among tooth lengths.
Outcomemiss index, multiple index and quality of feed index e0 Comparatordifferent tooth length e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “There was significant difference of miss index , multiple index and quality of feed index among different tooth length while precision affected by speed. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 727–879 t0 “sugarcane ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 64–73 Other claims from this paper (6) Method / resource observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
Quality of feed index averaged 71.44%.
Outcomequality of feed index e0 Verbatim
e0 “The general mean and standard error of quality of feed index were 71.44% and 1.33, respectively ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1028–1123 t0 “Carrot Seed ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 Other claims from this paper (10) Method / resource observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
The highest quality of feed index , 83.6 %, was found at the S1H1 setting.
Outcomequality of feed index e4 Not reported Taxon
Verbatim
e4 “highest percentage 83.6 % of quality of feed index was found at S1H1 ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 600–668 Other claims from this paper (5) Method / resource observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
The quality of feed index reached 92% under similar conditions.
Outcomequality of feed index e0 Verbatim
e0 “a quality of feed index as high as 92% was obtained in similar conditions ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1476–1549 t0 “Maize ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 Other claims from this paper (10) Method / resource observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
Seed plate 1 yielded a quality of feed index of 90%.
Treatmentseed plate (1) e1 Outcomequality of feed index e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
t0 “EGYPTIAN COTTON ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 64–79 e0 “quality of feed index of 90% ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1056–1084 e1 “were obtained with the seed plate (1) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1114–1151 Other claims from this paper (6) Method / resource observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
Minimum quality of feed index of the cotton transplanter was 89.9%.
Outcomequality of feed index e3 Verbatim
e3 “While minimum of seedling miss index , seedling multiple index and quality of feed index were 1.7%, 1.3% and 89.9% respectively ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1221–1347 e5 “cotton variety G86 ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 107–125 Other claims from this paper (11) Method / resource observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
Quality of feed index standard error was 1.33.
Outcomestandard error of quality of feed index e0 Verbatim
e0 “The general mean and standard error of quality of feed index were 71.44% and 1.33, respectively ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1028–1123 t0 “Carrot Seed ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 Other claims from this paper (10) Lexical search (BM25). All words must match; if nothing does, any word. Organism names also match every spelling of the same organism. No semantic search yet.