MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171067841 · doi:10.1177/0973005214526504

Abattoirs, Meat Processing and Managerial Challenges

2014· article· en· W2171067841 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Rural Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Development and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessMeat packing industryOverhead (engineering)Food processingAgricultural economicsMarketingEconomic growthEngineeringEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The meat processing sector is a significant contributor to the food economy, particularly in the Canadian province of Ontario. The sector contributed over $8 billion to the food manufacturing sector, and it employed over 647,000 people in 2011. In Ontario, there has been a great decline in the number of provincially licensed plants in the past 7 years. There were 183 provincially licensed slaughter plants in 2005; this number decreased to 142 by 2012. This study seeks to understand what challenges abattoirs and processors are currently facing and why abattoirs have closed in the past. The research shows that the major challenges facing abattoirs and processors are: regulatory challenges and administrative-related responsibilities, high overhead costs and a limited skilled labour force. These challenges have been mitigated by consumer preferences toward local food. Limitations of the study are presented and foundations for further research are suggested.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.199 · 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