MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153196347 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.36.3.391

Styles of Pig Farming and Family Labour in the Netherlands

2005· article· en· W2153196347 on OpenAlex
M.A.M. Commandeur

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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 Comparative Family Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureFamily farmBusinessStyle (visual arts)TourismWork (physics)Production (economics)SocioeconomicsGeographySociologyEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a survey conducted in 1998 of pig production farmers in the east of The Netherlands, labour division amongst family members appeared to depend on style of farming. The role of the men on the farm is connected to the attitude to hired labour: the more hired labour, the more the men become farm managers. The role of women on the farm is primarily connected to the age of their children. Women with young children perform farm activities that can be more easily combined with childcare. The role of women who are less occupied with young children varies amongst styles of farming. At the time of succession, it is often the women who initiate extra farm activities, like home procession and sales of farm products, involvement with tourism, et cetera. In the research five styles of farming were defined and given metaphoric names: entrepreneur, craftsman, steward, stockman, and shifter. Every style of farming showed a specific coherence in the organisation of the farm work.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.243 · 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