MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389732462 · doi:10.54033/cadpedv20n9-016

Agricultura familiar no Programa Nacional de Alimentação Escolar: percepção de agricultores no município de Ponta Porã-MS

2023· article· pt· W4389732462 on OpenAlexaff
Romildo Camargo Martins, Aline Robles Brito, Márcio Aquino Dos Santos, Rildo Vieira de Araújo, Jonas Benevides Correia, Micaella Lima Nogueira, Adriana Bilar Chaquime dos Santos, Reginaldo Brito da Costa

Bibliographic record

VenueCaderno Pedagógico · 2023
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRural Development and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceAgricultural scienceHumanitiesBusinessPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O Programa Nacional de Alimentação Escolar (PNAE) se apresenta como um importante canal de comercialização dos alimentos produzidos pela agricultura familiar, além de contribuir para o fortalecimento do segmento rural, que viven-cia constantes desafios para adquirir uma fatia do mercado consumidor, frente a acirrada competitividade do setor. Assim, o objetivo do presente artigo consis-te em analisar qual é o valor percebido pelos agricultores familiares da Coope-rativa dos Produtores do Assentamento Itamarati II – COOPERAI - através da sua participação no PNAE, a respeito da viabilidade econômica em participar deste programa. Trata-se de uma pesquisa descritiva e exploratória de caráter qualitativo, complementada por dados quantitativos, ou seja, por métodos mis-tos, sendo a pesquisa de campo, realizada por meio de entrevistas informais e semiestruturadas. Os resultados indicam que as percepções dos agricultores entrevistados se estabelecem em dois extremos: i) a existência de uma depen-dência financeira ao programa, principalmente pelos produtores que atuam há mais tempo no PNAE; e, ii) enquanto para outros produtores o PNAE é apenas uma das fontes para a comercialização da sua produção.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCaderno PedagógicoSame topicRural Development and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207