MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147189751

Transaction Costs, Hold-Ups and Governance in Ethanol Supply Chains

2012· article· en· W3147189751 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jill E. Hobbs, Simon Weseen, William A. Kerr

Bibliographic record

Venue2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthanol fuelSupply chainTransaction costRaw materialContext (archaeology)BusinessIndustrial organizationProduction (economics)GasolineCommerceEconomicsBiofuelMicroeconomicsWaste managementChemistryMarketingEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The long-run commercial viability of ethanol production depends on the ability to access an inexpensive and reliable supply of inputs as well as finding stable markets for ethanol and its co-products. A unique feature of ethanol plants is their position at the intersection of multiple supply chains which result in the production of grain products, livestock, and fuel (blended gasoline). The primary feedstock for first generation ethanol production is cereal grain (corn or wheat), while output from ethanol plants include not only ethanol for fuel, but also co-products used in livestock feeding. Transaction Cost Economics provides a lens through which to examine the juxtaposition of the multiple supply chain relationships that characterize the business environment for an ethanol plant. This paper examines the supply chain relationships in the Canadian ethanol industry within a transaction cost context. Sources of transaction costs and hold-up are identified, and inferences are drawn for the types of governance structures that may emerge in the long-run.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, BrazilSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207