MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing Technical Efficiency of Québec Dairy Farms

2003· article· en· W2073720799 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Msafiri Daudi Mbaga, Robert Romain, Bruno Larue, Luc LeBel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersCanadian Dairy Commission
KeywordsInefficiencyData envelopment analysisStatisticsEconometricsMathematicsParametric statisticsStandard deviationStochastic dominanceRanking (information retrieval)Index (typography)Dominance (genetics)Robustness (evolution)EconomicsComputer scienceBiologyMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is twofold. Our first objective is to measure the level of technical efficiency of Québec dairy farms. Our second objective is to gauge the robustness of our results with respect to the selection of a functional form and of a distribution for the inefficiency index. We estimate efficiency frontiers for Cobb‐Douglas (C‐D), translogarithmic (TL) and generalized Leontief (GL) production functions with half‐normal, truncated normal and exponential distributions. Our results, based on likelihood dominance criterion (LDC) indicate that the GL production technology dominates the other two functional forms, and this ranking is robust to changes in the distribution of the inefficiency index. Efficiency scores and ranks are highly correlated for all the functional forms and distributions. The differences in the mean levels of efficiency are statistically significant across functional forms and distributions, although the magnitude of the difference is minuscule. The very high mean level of efficiency and the low standard deviation confirms that Québec dairy farms are very homogenous in terms of getting the most from their inputs. This is not surprising, given that the sector has been very stable policywise and that it has been difficult for dairy farmers to expand. To augment the comparisons, results obtained from data envelopment analysis (DEA), are added to the analysis. In this case, the correlation coefficients between DEA and parametric specifications are found to be very low.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations61
Published2003
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207