MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318101822 · doi:10.17059/2011-4-2

Multifunctionality of agri-food sector: theoretic conseption, practical implementation

2011· article· en· W2318101822 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomy of Regions · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture Market Analysis Ukraine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessFood sectorEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceAgricultureEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The term multifunctionality of agriculture began to be used in connection with the development of discussions on state support for agricultural production and its impact on the situation on the world food market in the WTO. Countries interested in export expansion argued that such support distorts market relations and hinders trade liberalization. Their opponents objected, arguing that agriculture not only produces and sells products, but also performs a number of socially important functions necessary to the harmonious development of rural areas, environmental protection etc. That's why it needs state support which should be provided. The first group of countries includes the United States, Canada, Australia and other major exporters of food. The second one -the EU states, Japan and developing countries, the states of the EurAsEC can be also referred to this group.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.196 · 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