MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994128960 · doi:10.4141/p05-211

How the introduction of late season sweet cherry cultivars and changing demand conditions impacted industry competitiveness: Evidence from British Columbia

2007· article· en· W1994128960 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Richard Carew, Norman E. Looney

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCultivarCommercializationIntellectual propertyGovernment (linguistics)LegislationPlant varietyBusinessAgricultural economicsEconomyEconomicsPolitical scienceMarketingBiologyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the importance of government research and innovation policies designed to reflect changing demand conditions and strengthen competitiveness of the British Columbia (BC) sweet cherry industry. Canadian plant breeding programs have responded to market demand by releasing cultivars that have extended the marketing season and resulted in higher export price premiums earned in European and Asian markets. Stronger Canadian intellectual property rights (IPR) legislation has facilitated the commercialization of a range of cultivars with valuable attributes. However, the combination of Canada being a net importer of sweet cherries and the rapid adoption of BC cultivars by Washington State orchardists has challenged Canadian policy makers to implement IPR policies that can contribute to maximizing royalty returns and sustain the Canadian plant breeding program. Key words: Sweet cherry cultivars, plant breeding, intellectual property rights

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207