MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318578635 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2022-0075

Farm size distribution in the Canadian livestock sector

2023· article· en· W4318578635 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Andrew VanderZaag, Shabtai Bittman, Maria Wellisch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsLivestockDistribution (mathematics)AgricultureSmall farmDiversity (politics)Agricultural scienceCensusAgricultural economicsGeographyBusinessBiologyEconomicsEcologyMathematicsForestryPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study quantified the distribution of animals by farm size for portions of the dairy, beef, swine, and poultry sectors using the 2016 Census of Agriculture. Results showed that the distribution of farm sizes and animal populations were skewed or bimodal and varied by livestock type and by province. Thus, the average farm size has little meaning. Recognizing farm size diversity is important for developing effective policies and programs, conducting appropriate research, and developing practices and technologies to support farms of all sizes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207