MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525600950 · doi:10.5296/rae.v8i3.10071

The Compostable Coffee Pod: Is PürPod100tm the Best Thing Since Sliced Bread? A Case Study on Club Coffee

2016· article· en· W2525600950 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvain Charlebois, Paul Uys

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Applied Economics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClubSupply chainBusinessDistribution (mathematics)SustainabilityAgricultural scienceMarketingMathematicsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With consumer consciousness growing in the area of sustainable food supply, food distribution is looking for methods to embrace, adapt and improve its environmental performance, while still remaining economically competitive. Until recent innovative solutions were developed, coffee pods have been considered as an ecologically unsound approach to single-serve beverages. Some have argued that reverse logistics (recycling) is a better option than green supply chain management (composting). With a particular focus on coffee pods a case study on Club Coffee, which focuses on green supply chain management, is presented for the design of a capacitated distribution network for a two-layer supply chain involved in the distribution of coffee pods in Canada. Our investigation shows that Club Coffee’s relationship is not only critical to fostering the green supply chain ideology, but it is also unique in the business. Findings are presented and limitations and future research are proposed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Applied EconomicsSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207