MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126916296 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.32021

South Dakota's Hog Market: Developments and Prospects

2001· article· en· W2126916296 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew A. Diersen

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)CashAgricultural economicsQuarter (Canadian coin)Price indexEconomicsGeographyBusinessFinanceEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the developments that have occurred in South Dakota's swine industry and offers insights into its future prospects. Data, trends, and literature related to this market were gathered in an effort to fill in specific gaps about South Dakota's market. Nationally and in South Dakota there are fewer producers raising hogs. The exit of relatively small producers from the industry reduced a seasonal spike of farrowings during the March-May quarter in recent years. A growing trend of inshipments, where feeder pigs are brought into South Dakota, finished, and marketed, has partially offset the reduction in farrowings. An analysis of a longstanding indicator of supply, farrowing intentions, reveals that the closer intentions reported were more accurate than the distant intentions and that the overall accuracy is impressive. The general price level for market hogs at Sioux Falls follows a similar pattern to U.S. prices. A seasonal trend exists at Sioux Falls, with prices higher from May through August. Analysis of location basis, the difference between the CME Lean Hog Index and the cash price at Sioux Falls, with prices higher from May through August. Analysis of location basis, the difference between the CME Lean Hog Index and the cash price at Sioux Falls, also reveals a seasonal trend and substantial variablity across different months. Knowledge of basis is necessary when comparing different markets and when determining the effectiveness of risk management tools.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207