MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105363443 · doi:10.1017/s1074070800026894

Predicting Pork Supplies: An Application of Multiple Forecast Encompassing

2004· article· en· W2105363443 on OpenAlex
Dwight R. Sanders, Mark R. Manfredo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Applied Economics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnivariateQuarter (Canadian coin)Competitor analysisEconometricsProduction (economics)Forecast errorHorizonStatisticsService (business)EconomicsOperations researchOperations managementComputer scienceMathematicsMarketingBusinessMicroeconomicsGeographyMultivariate statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conditional efficiency or forecast encompassing is tested among alternative pork production forecasts using the method proposed by Harvey and Newbold. One-, two-, and three-quarter ahead pork production forecasts made by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the University of Illinois and Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service, and those produced by a univariate time series model are evaluated. The encompassing tests provide considerably more information about forecast performance than a simple pair-wise test for equality of mean squared errors. The results suggest that at a one-quarter horizon, the Extension service forecasts encompass the competitors, but at longer horizons, a composite forecast may provide greater accuracy.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.240 · 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