Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 79

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Information quality and effectiveness for more rapid adoption decisions by farmers

Llewellyn, Rick S.·2007·Field Crops Research
DOI 10.1016/j.fcr.2007.03.022
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fcr.2007.03.022

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Walker, E., 2005. Farmer valuation of research information by distance and research organisation. Honours Research Thesis. School of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Western Australia.

Cited by

See all 79

Metadata

Authors
Llewellyn, R. S.
Venue
Field Crops Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-10
Volume
104
Issue
1-3
Pages
148-156
ISSN
0378-4290
DOI
10.1016/j.fcr.2007.03.022
Cited by
79
References
36
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.