MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123026262

Enhancing Food Safety and Productivity: Technology Use in the Canadian Food Processing Industry

2002· article· en· W3123026262 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Sabourin, John R. Baldwin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityBusinessCash flowProduct (mathematics)Food processingFood safetyQuality (philosophy)Food industryEmerging technologiesIndustrial organizationEnvironmental economicsAgricultural economicsNatural resource economicsMarketingEconomicsFinanceFood scienceEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the factors contributing to the adoption of advanced technologies in the Canadian food-processing sector. The numbers of technologies used by a plant is found to be highly correlated with expected gains in firm performance. The benefits of enhanced food safety and quality, as well as productivity improvements, are closely associated with technology use. Impediments that negatively affect technology use include software costs, problems with external financing, lack of cash flow for financing, and internal management problems. Even after accounting for the different benefits and costs associated with technology adoption, the numbers of advanced technologies that are adopted are found to be greater in larger plants, in foreign-controlled plants, in plants that engage in both primary and secondary processing, and in the dairy, fruit and vegetable and "other" food product industries.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical Studies Branch Research Paper SeriesSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207