MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032244845 · doi:10.7202/800398ar

Ontario Agriculture in the 1910s: The Move Toward Regional Specialization in Crop Production

2009· article· en· W2032244845 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Patricia Bowley

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubsistence agricultureAgricultureWork (physics)Production (economics)Mixed farmingAgroforestryAgricultural economicsFamily farmBusinessAgricultural scienceSoil conservationGeographyIntegrated farmingEconomicsEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until the beginning of the 1910s, mixed farming was the most common type of agriculture in Ontario and was based on "self-subsistence": the farm family produced as many of the essentials of life as possible and traded for the other things they needed. During the decade 1910-1920, specialization was recognized as the most practical way to earn a comfortable living at farming. There were two important reasons for this move: the recognition that all crops were not adapted to each climatic and geographic region of Ontario; and the desire to farm according to the principles of soil conservation or "good farming" while still maximizing profits. The Ontario Department of Agriculture in conjunction with the Ontario Agricultural College at Guelph was very active in conducting research and extension work. Through these programs, farmers were able to choose the particular crops and soil management systems which were the best for them.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and MedicineSame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207