MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Decomposed Negative Binomial Model of Structural Change: A Theoretical and Empirical Application to U.S. Agriculture

2005· article· fr· W1969674509 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. S. Kim, Gerald Schluter, Glenn D. Schaible, Ashok K. Mishra, Charles B. Hallahan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryNegative binomial distributionAgricultureEconomicsWelfare economicsHumanitiesMathematicsPolitical scienceGeographyStatisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We developed a single‐equation decomposed negative binomial regression model (NBRM) of the U.S. farm sector to simultaneously evaluate structural changes in the U.S. agricultural sector and the strength of several economic forces that influenced the changes in farm structure during the 1960–96 period. We found all these forces reinforced economic incentives to increase the size and decrease the number of small farms. Only agricultural programs and machinery prices countered these forces. Nous avons élaboré un modèle de régression binomiale négative (NBRM) décomposéàéquation unique pour le secteur agricole des États‐Unis afin d'évaluer simultanément les changements structurels de ce secteur ainsi que la puissance de plusieurs forces économiques qui ont influencé les changements de structure des exploitations agricoles au cours de la période 1960–96. Nous avons conclu que toutes ces forces ont renforcé les stimulants économiques en faveur d'une augmentation de la taille des exploitations et d'une diminution du nombre de petites exploitations. Seuls les programmes agricoles et le prix de la machinerie ont contrecarré ces forces.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207