MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899412664

TiO2: : Kronos profits surge on higher TiO2 prices, sales

2017· article· eo· W2899412664 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial Minerals · 2017
Typearticle
Languageeo
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)CurrencyAgricultural economicsProfit (economics)BusinessMonetary economicsEconomicsCommerceGeographyMicroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improved results; TiO2 prices up 17%; Demand on the rise Kronos Worldwide reported rising profits on May 8, citing average TiO2 selling prices and higher sales volumes. Profit at the US-based company's TiO2 segment surged to $56.5m over the first quarter of 2017, compared to just $3.8m a year earlier. The increase was driven by rising prices, which were up 17% over the period, supporting segment sales. Sales volumes of TiO2 were reported at 143,000 tonnes over the quarter, compared to 138,000 tonnes a year ago. Kronos' production was also up, rising by some 14,000 tonnes to 145,000 tonnes. We operated our production facilities at an overall average capacity utilisation rate of 100% in the first quarter of 2017 compared to approximately 97% in the first quarter of 2016, Kronos said. Profits were also boosted by lower raw materials costs, but currency fluctuations trimmed gains. Across the whole company, Kronos reported net-sales of $369.8m in the first quarter of 2017, up 16% year on year. Profits surged to $36.8m, compared to a loss of $3.8m a year ago. Kronos is the latest titanium dioxide seller to report improving financials. Tronox last week reported that its titanium segment swing from loss to profit in the first quarter, thanks to rising sales. Titanium dioxide prices

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0860.045

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.090 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial MineralsSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207