MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507209890 · doi:10.1111/cjag.12168

Consumers’ Valuation of Rice‐Grade Labeling

2018· article· en· W2507209890 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Young Woon Choi, Ji Yong Lee, Doo Bong Han, Rodolfo M. Nayga

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsGrading (engineering)Valuation (finance)Willingness to payBusinessContingent valuationEconomicsMicroeconomicsEngineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The current Korean rice‐grading system has a “no test” option that allows rice to not be graded in the market. This study examines Korean consumers’ valuation of a rice‐grading system without the “no test” option. We apply a nonhypothetical experimental auction to elicit consumers’ willingness to pay for each rice grade and identify the impact of the provision of additional grading information on product valuation. We then use contingent and inferred valuations to obtain consumers’ valuation of a mandatory rice‐grading system without the “no test” option. We find that Korean consumers are willing to pay an additional premium for each rice grade and that rice‐grading information is the most important factor that differentiates the rice products. Rice consumers in Korea also strongly prefer a mandatory rice‐grading system without the “no test” option.

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)0.006
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 score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.067 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207