MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1907693291 · doi:10.1002/agr.21383

The Demand for Pork Products in Canada: Discount Promotions and Cannibalization

2014· article· en· W1907693291 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgribusiness · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannibalizationSpillover effectConsumer demandEconomicsPromotion (chess)Profit (economics)BusinessMarketingMicroeconomicsIndustrial organization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We estimate the effectiveness of offering discounts on the demand for featured pork products using Ipsos‐Reid's Consumer Panel of Canada data for a 1‐year period from April 2007 to March 2008, and explore whether there are any positive or negative spillover effects on non‐featured products because of these discounts. We find strong evidence that, as expected, discounts increase the purchases of the featured products. However, we find that offering discounts may have cannibalistic effects – negative cross‐discount effects – on non‐featured products, and that these effects vary considerably among pork products. From the retailers’ perspective, as profit margins have become smaller, our results indicate the need to develop a promotion strategy that minimizes the cannibalistic effects from discounts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.152 · 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