MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390041688 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.11767

Least-cost diets to teach optimization and consumer behavior, with applications to health equity, poverty measurement and international development

2023· preprint· en· W4390041688 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jessica K. Wallingford, William A. Masters

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPovertyMaximizationSquashEquity (law)Consumption (sociology)WorkbookLinear programmingEconomicsComputer scienceEconometricsSupplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramMarketingEnvironmental economicsPublic economicsAgricultural economicsMicroeconomicsAgricultureBusinessEconomic growthAccountingSocial scienceFood security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The least-cost diet problem introduces students to optimization and linear programming, using the health consequences of food choice. We provide a graphical example, Excel workbook and Word template using actual data on item prices, food composition and nutrient requirements for a brief exercise in which students guess at and then solve for nutrient adequacy at lowest cost, before comparing modeled diets to actual consumption which has varying degrees of nutrient adequacy. The graphical example is a 'three sisters' diet of corn, beans and squash, and the full multidimensional model is compared to current food consumption in Ethiopia. This updated Stigler diet shows how cost minimization relates to utility maximization, and links to ongoing research and policy debates about the affordability of healthy diets worldwide.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.008

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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.098 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→