MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Supporting Local Food in Northern Ontario

2017· article· en· W3011494415 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Katherine Howes

Bibliographic record

VenueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and Policy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessDirectoryAllianceDistribution (mathematics)Northern irelandProduction (economics)Ecosystem servicesRural areaFood processingEnvironmental resource managementGeographyMarketingEnvironmental planningEcologyComputer scienceEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In attempting to understand the challenges faced by Northern Ontario with regards to locally produced food, this research is focusing on inventorying the existing production and distribution services available to farmers in Northern Ontario. Working with several Northern Ontario organizations including RAIN (Rural Agri-Innovation Network), NOFIA (Northern Ontario Farm Innovation Alliance), Northern Producer Animal Health Network, OFA and OMAFRA, a directory of these services ranging from production level services (veterinarians, crop advisors) to value added services (dairies, creameries) to distribution and retail services will be compiled to both identify where gaps in services exist and to also inform existing and potential Northern Ontario farmers of the existing services available to them. This project will attempt to link not only producers and distributors but also various communities through a networked approach. It will also identify systems currently in place to produce and distribute food and will identify best practices for increasing access to local food.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and PolicySame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207