MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598134710 · doi:10.3390/ani7030026

A Review of Sustainability Enhancements in the Beef Value Chain: State-of-the-Art and Recommendations for Future Improvements

2017· review· en· W2598134710 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Danielle Maia de Souza, Ruaraidh Petre, Fawn Jackson, Monica Hadarits, Sarah J. Pogue, Cameron N. Carlyle, Edward W. Bork, Tim A. McAllister

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Supply Chain Traceability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of AlbertaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersBeef Cattle Research CouncilAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMitacs
KeywordsSustainabilityContext (archaeology)Stakeholder engagementBusinessBeef industryStakeholderOrder (exchange)Sustainable developmentSustainable ValueEnvironmental resource managementPolitical sciencePublic relationsGeographyEconomicsAgricultural economicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The beef sector is working towards continually improving its sustainability in order to achieve environmentally, socially and economically desirable outcomes, all of which are of increasing concern to consumers. In this context, the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB) provides guidance to advance the sustainability of the beef industry, through increased stakeholder engagement and the formation of national roundtables. Recently, the 2nd Global Conference on Sustainable Beef took place in Banff, Alberta, Canada, hosted by the GRSB and the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef. Conference attendees discussed the various initiatives that are being developed to address aspects of beef sustainability. This paper reviews the main discussions that occurred during this event, along with the key lessons learned, messages, and strategies that were proposed to improve the sustainability of the global beef industry.

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)0.004
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicFood Supply Chain TraceabilityFrench-language works237,207