MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2274020955 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.198079

Improving the Competitiveness of Beef Production in the Northern Contiguous United States and Canada

2003· article· en· W2274020955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrazingIce calvingOffspringPastureBiologyAnimal scienceHerdCow-calfGeographyAgronomyLactationPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problems for North American Beef ProducersThe beef production industry in North America is unlikely to benefit from any market price increases for the foreseeable future.On the contrary, real (inflation-adjusted) prices are likely to decline further in the face of greater competition from other meats and from low-cost countries such as Brazil and New Zealand as international trading becomes less restricted.This behooves North American beef producers to reduce production costs in order to remain competitive.Two possibilities for cost reductions present themselves.One is through technological progress, such as genetic engineering, embryo transplants, breeding synchronization, etc.The other is through finding more productive and efficient management practices, such as increasing calving rates, reducing the costs of stored feeds, labor and other inputs, or obtaining added value by marketing progeny at higher liveweights.This study focused on the second of these two possibilities, and in particular on examining combinations of management practices that offer alternatives to traditional production procedures.

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)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→