Bibliographic record
Abstract
THERE IS LITTLE OVERALL DIrection evident in the results of 12 large and midsized chemical companies that have reported fourth-quarter results. Half have had declines in earnings from continuing operations, excluding significant one-time gains and charges. The other six showed improvements. The six with higher earnings include Monsanto and Dow Chemical, which went from red ink in fourth-quarter 2002 to positive results in the same period in 2003. Monsanto improved by $19 million, rising to $10 million in earnings from a $9 million loss in the same period a year earlier. Sales at Monsanto increased 21.5% to $1.03 billion. CEO Hugh Grant says performance for the quarter "was anchored by improved Roundup and branded seed corn results in Brazil." Indeed, total sales for the company's Roundup herbicide improved 65% from the prior year's quarter to $429 million. But it was industry leader Dow that showed an especially large jump, rising ...
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 | 0.021 | 0.135 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.416 | 0.135 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".