MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946938859

The Great Canadian Maple Syrup Consumption

2019· article· en· W2946938859 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interdisciplinary Science Topics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPlant-Derived Bioactive Compounds
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaplePopulationMathematicsBotanyDemographyBiologySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper looks to provide insight on the Canadian stereotype of using and producing maple syrup, investigating if the Canadian production of the sweetener could support each Canadian having maple syrup at breakfast every day for a year. First, it is estimated how much maple syrup would be consumed for a specific age group and sex using suggested daily Calorie (kcal) values and Canadian demographic population estimates. A sample calculation is outlined for males aged 20-24, finding that solely for this age group it would require 6.24x10 4  L of maple syrup for one day’s consumption. This method is then repeated for each age group and sex (see Appendix), then summed and multiplied by 365, getting a final value of 5.11x10 8  L of maple syrup in total for the whole year. Therefore, it was determined that since the annual production of maple syrup in 2017 was only 5.69x10 7  L, it would not be sustainable for every Canadian to have maple syrup at breakfast for an entire year.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.282
Teacher spread0.265 · 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