MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W253660849

Staples and Staple Theory

2005· article· en· W253660849 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Morris Altman

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Technological Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaple foodEconomicsUnit (ring theory)Distribution (mathematics)Supply sideInternational economicsAgricultureGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The staple theory was developed as an analytical framework to help explain the economic evolution of countries which have a relative abundance of land and natural resources, such as Canada. It can also be used to determine under what conditions staple-related economic activity positively contributes to economic development. Early staple theory maintained that the ability to overcome or take advantage of geographical factors was critical to bring staples to markets competitively. Regions can do little to effect demand, however having the capacity to reduce the unit costs of staples, such as transport cost, is critical to the development of staple exports. More recently, the introduction of linkages into analytical frameworks has been of particular importance. The extent and strength of linkages between staple products and the rest of the economy is important in determining the ultimate effect of staple exports on output growth. Even if staple exports constitute only a small percentage of GDP, staple production can still be a dominate force in the economy by way of its complex linkages. However some economies fail to develop potential linkages falling into the staple trap. Often these economies are underdeveloped or have an unequal distribution of income. Staple theory is useful in the explanation of the successes and failures in staple-related development. For an economy to be successful it must make important supply-side decisions and strengthen linkages within the economy.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicEconomic and Technological InnovationFrench-language works237,207