MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Frontier Agriculture and the Creation of Global Neo-Europes

2024· book-chapter· en· W4392939732 on OpenAlex
Jonathan Daly

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Development and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColossus computerFrontierAgriculturePolitical scienceEconomyPosition (finance)Economic historyWorld economyGeographyDevelopment economicsEconomic geographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the late nineteenth century, five countries topped the list of global wheat exporters: Russia, the United States, Canada, Argentina, and Australia. All five benefited from ongoing technological innovations but could not have become breadbaskets of the world without some of the richest grassland on the planet. Their global output was spurred in large part by the booming industrial economy requiring vastly more grain for burgeoning urban labor forces. Although the Soviet collectivization drive derailed the Russian agricultural colossus, it was back on track and had reached the number one position in world wheat exports by 2018. The other four early breadbaskets remained in the top six, suggesting something like an environmental determinism at work.

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.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.158 · 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