Bibliographic record
Abstract
The United States and Canada have developed very different grain handling and transportation systems (GHTSs) over the last several decades to compete for global and domestic markets in Canada and the United States under CUSTA. Because the grain industries in both countries face long distance hauls, GHTSs are critically important to their operations and to producer returns. There has been considerable pressure for change in Canada's grain handling and transportation sector. Some industry trends, such as the rationalization of elevators in the Prairies and investments in new high through-put facilities, are being driven by market and competitive forces. Changes in grain handling, reciprocal access to marketing functions, and elimination of rate caps may have a significant impact on cross-border grain flows. Canadian Transport announced reforms to improve the efficiency of its GHTS. Possible multi-level effects, created by the reform package, would affect the grain flow from Canada to the United States. The most significant reforms include 'port buying' by the Canadian Wheat Board, which would remove the Board's control over internal logistics and shipping, and replacement of the current maximum railway rate scale with a cap on annual railway revenues for grain shipments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".