MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193858045 · doi:10.1590/0100-29452021021

Brazilian position in the international fresh fruit trade network

2021· article· en· W3193858045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diego Rodrigues Bornal, Murilo Mazzotti Silvestrini, Leila Aparecida Salles Pio, Ana Cláudia Costa, Pedro Maranha Peche, Martha Cristina Pereira Ramos

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Fruticultura · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgribusinessPosition (finance)International marketAgricultureRanking (information retrieval)Agricultural economicsQuarter (Canadian coin)International tradeBusinessGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The fruit growing activity is of great importance for Brazilian agribusiness as the country is the third largest fruit producer in the world. Despite this notability, the fruit market presents obstacles especially related to international trade. Thus, the present study sought to determine the positioning and evolution of Brazil in the international fresh fruit market. Data used in the research were obtained from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (1986 to 2017) and the World Bank (2018), using metrics of export flow, quantity and income of countries related to the main fruits exported by Brazil in the first quarter of 2020. Data were manipulated, transformed into figures and graphs for better visualization of information. The Brazilian position in the in the ranking of fresh fruit exports was not very dynamic during the evaluation period, being dependent on the demand from high-income European countries.

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)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de FruticulturaSame topicAgricultural and Food SciencesFrench-language works237,207