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

Abattoirs, Meat Processing and Managerial Challenges

2014· article· en· W2171067841 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvain Charlebois, Amit Summan

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.027
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

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 designQualitative
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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Rural ManagementSame topicRegional Development and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207