MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234371925 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.163865

Disruption in the NAFTA Supply Chain for Beef and Cattle: An Evaluation of Possible Policy Responses

2005· preprint· en· W2234371925 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Danny G. Le Roy, Jeevika Weerahewa, David P. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2005
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBovine spongiform encephalopathyMarket accessProtectionismHarmonizationBusinessSupply chainInternational tradeFree trade agreementBeef cattleConfusionFree tradeAgricultural economicsEconomicsAgricultureGeographyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Before 20 May 2003 the beef and cattle sectors in North America were shining examples of harmonization and market integration under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). They are now stunning and troubling examples of disharmony, market segregation, and confusion. The supply chain for beef, which was working well, is now a mess. Losing access to the live cattle market in the United States has motivated Canadian decision-makers in both the public and private sectors to focus almost entirely on the domestic market for solutions. In the United States, border closures have threatened the viability of beef processing plants in the Pacifi c Northwest and have helped raise the profi le of protectionist cattle producer organizations. Mexico has fared better than its NAFTA partners since it remains free of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and has continued to maintain access to the US market.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207