MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156968241 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v8n1p226

Profitability and Value Addition in Cassava Processing in Buton District of Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia

2015· article· en· W2156968241 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haji Saediman, Asmiati Amini, Rosmawaty Basiru, La Ode Nafiu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal socioeconomic and cultural dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexProduction (economics)Value (mathematics)Agricultural scienceWelfareAgricultural economicsEconomicsBusinessMathematicsStatisticsEnvironmental scienceMicroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was carried out to examine profitability of and value addition from cassava processing into kaopi based on the type of graters being used. A two-stage random sampling technique was employed to obtain primary data from 53 respondents selected for this study. Data were analyzed using cost and return analysis, R/C ratio, Break Even Point, and production structure. The study revealed that cassava processing into kaopi is profitable and a significant value adding process, but the level of profitability and value addition is higher for processors using mechanized grater than those using manual one because the former can reduce processing costs, process higher volume of raw materials, and produce more output with greater efficiency. In view of its potential for attainment of food security, and income and employment generation, it is recommended that processors who currently use manual grater shift to mechanized grater since the time and money saved can be put into other economic use and family welfare.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
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

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

Citations31
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicGlobal socioeconomic and cultural dynamicsFrench-language works237,207