MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403776263 · doi:10.4236/ajibm.2024.1410069

Ranking of Greenhouse Vegetable Suppliers across Three Canadian Provinces Using Data Envelopment Analysis with Multiple Inputs and Outputs

2024· article· en· W4403776263 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mazyar Zahedi-Seresht, Sonali Maldini Rajasekara

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Industrial and Business Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsUniversity Canada West
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData envelopment analysisRanking (information retrieval)GreenhouseAgricultural economicsBusinessStatisticsEnvironmental economicsEconomicsComputer scienceMathematicsBiologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the application of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) as a tool for evaluating the operational efficiency of agricultural operations in Canada under varying conditions. While traditional DEA models are designed for precise input-output data, they may not adequately address uncertainties present in real-world scenarios. This research extends the conventional DEA framework to accommodate multiple scenarios, specifically assessing greenhouse, sod, and nursery operations in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec from 2019 to 2023. Utilizing a modified DEA model that remains linear and computationally efficient, this study evaluates efficiency based on various input and output metrics, including operational expenses and product value. Findings indicate that Quebec achieved full operational efficiency consistently, whereas Ontario and British Columbia showed improvement over time but did not match Quebec’s performance. Introducing a multi-scenario approach enhances the robustness of efficiency analysis in agricultural contexts. However, the study notes certain limitations, such as the static nature of the analysis and the exclusion of qualitative factors.

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)0.004
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 score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Industrial and Business ManagementSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207