Bibliographic record
Abstract
Farmland has been a good investment over the past 30 years, as part of an internationally diversified medium‐risk portfolio. For average or medium levels of risk, farmland can enhance the financial performance of an investment portfolio. Investors who choose to maintain a low‐risk portfolio will not include farmland and, similarly, the gains at the high‐risk level are also very minimal. The financial gains from farmland are a result of its negatively correlated returns with other equity markets. When added to an equity portfolio, the risk is reduced while maintaining the same rate of return on investment. This is especially true of the medium‐risk portfolios. Farmland investment has associated problems including illiquidity, poor marketability and asset lumpiness. A potential solution to these problems is to allow the organization of a Saskatchewan (or Canadian) farmland mutual fund. L'achat de terres agricoles s'est révélé un bon placement dans les 30 dernières années dans le cadre d'un portefeuille à risque modéré internationalement diversifié. Dans la catégorie de risque moyen ou modéré, la propriété de terres agricoles peut accroître le rendement économique d'un poriefeuille de placement. Les investisseurs qui choisissent de maintenir un poriefeuille à faible risque ne s'intéresseront pas aux terres agricoles, et par ailleurs, les gains au niveau de risque élevé sont également trés maigres. Les gains financiers tirés de la propriété de terres agricoles sont la résultante de la corrélation négative du rendement économique avec celle des autres marchés de valeurs. En ajoutant les terres agricoles à un portefeuille de valeurs mobilig̀res, on abaisse le niveau de risque tout en conservant le même taux de rendement sur les placements. C'est particulièrement vrai des portefeuilles à risque modéré. Les placements dans les terres agricoles component des inconvénients comme l'illiquidité, la difflculté de revendre et l;indivisibilité. Une solution à ces proxblèmes serait d'autoriser la constitution d'un fonds mutuel de terres agricoles, soit pour la province de Saskatchewan ou pour l'ensemble du pays.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".