MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2292158551

Orderly Marketing Fact, Fiction or Fantasy?

2008· article· en· W2292158551 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSecurities Regulation and Market Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFantasyAdvertisingArtMarketingAestheticsBusinessLiterature
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I got wheat to sell; it’s not even mine It’s made of paper and it’s borrowed on time. I sell short; he sells high; We all end up with a big piece of pie. “The Grain Exchange Rag,” (25 th Street Theatre, 1982, 56, 57) The term “orderly marketing ” originated in the United States to describe the marketing procedures of orange growers cooperatives. The term was eventually incorporated into legislation as the objective of the Canadian Wheat Board Act. However, historical analysis shows the term was essentially meaningless, raising questions as to precisely what the mandate of the Board actually is. The objective of this paper is to examine the fundamental objective of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) as it is defined in its legislation, to trace and assess the historic roots of that objective, and to consider the implication of that assessment for the legitimacy of that objective today.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.207 · 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