MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213303994 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v23i4.4470

A Case Study of Cattle Prices in Nicaragua

2021· article· en· W4213303994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jameson Augustin, Jose Antonio Lopez, Ervin Leiva, Rafael Bakhtavoryan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractCommon value auctionFeeder cattleLatin AmericansEconomicsFutures marketPrice discoveryAgricultural economicsBusinessFinancial economicsAgricultural scienceMicroeconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Latin America has become the leading region for beef and poultry exports worldwide (FAO, 2020a). We conduct a case study of cattle prices in Nicaragua, the leading meat producing country in Central America.1 Using data on futures on feeder cattle prices from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Group (CME) supplemented with a two-year data on 2,520 sales transactions from 99 auctions from the Nicaraguan Cattle Auction (NCA), this study conducts a hedonic price analysis for cattle auctioned in Nicaragua. In particular, the study empirically identifies factors affecting price differentials for cattle and examines their correlation with the futures market. Our results show that weight, lot size, and class are among statistically significant factors impacting cattle auction prices while their correlation with the futures market is significant for six out of the eight futures variables corresponding to the contract months at the CME. The results of the study help Nicaraguan cattle buyers and sellers understand information from the futures market to predict price differences and reduce price risk and uncertainty.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207