MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243738317 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.306087

Re-engineering the Logistics of Canadian Grain Handling, or "Back to the Sacks?"

2020· article· en· W2243738317 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barry E. Prentice, J Kosior, Jim Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLaw, logistics, and international trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainContainerizationBusinessIndustrial organizationEngineeringOperations managementManufacturing engineeringEngineering managementMarketingMechanical engineeringContainer (type theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Re-engineering a logistical process involves radical redesign and the use of technology to achieve a quantum improvement in supply chain performance. This paper explores the opportunity to re-engineer the logistics of the Canadian grain handling system. The first section sets out the historic development of the current bulk handling system. This is followed by a discussion of the economic advantages and disadvantages of bulk handling, and the role of the grading system. Subsequently, the analysis examines five principals of logistics that make the containerization of grain a competitive alternative. The paper concludes with a discussion of a new institutional framework that would facilitate the re-engineering of the grain trade.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.008
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicLaw, logistics, and international tradeFrench-language works237,207