MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287396237

Financial Analysis of Water Management Practices in Cranberry Production in Quebec, Canada

2024· preprint· en· W4287396237 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ana-Maria Bogdan, Suren Kulshreshtha, Jean Caron

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessProduction (economics)FinanceAgricultural economicsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At a global scale, Canada is the second largest cranberry producer, with Quebec being the largest producing region within Canada. Efficient water use in agricultural production has long been a topic of outmost importance to agricultural producers, and governing bodies. The immediacy of climate change effects sped up the need to find solutions that conserve water. One such promising technology is irrigation using real-time tensiometers, which provides rapidly critical irrigation needs information to producers. Adoption of improved technologies by farmers is dependent on the effect it has on the farms’ bottom line. In this study, we examine the financial performance of real-time tensiometer based irrigation, and compare it to evaporation needs based irrigation (baseline), in the context of a Quebec-based cranberry farm. Our findings show that irrigating using real-time tensiometers technology generated higher economic returns. With a net present value of $96,847, this technology increased returns by nearly 53% compared to the baseline technology. Subsequent sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings, even when changing important farming parameters.

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)0.002
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 score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207