Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEstos cuatro paises cuentan con un sector agrario y agroalimentario extraordinariamente desarrollado y orientado al mercado y con un cooperativismo en consonancia. De hecho, puede decirse que el grado de desarrollo del sector es una consecuencia directa del desarrollo e implantacion del cooperativismo. Por otra parte, la estructura productiva de estos paises se asienta en explotaciones de dimension media considerablemente superior a la europea, pero ello no significa que los productores no tengan necesidad de integrarse en cooperativas y, salvo el caso de Australia, donde no han existido a lo largo de su historia politicas incentivadoras, tanto Canada, como los Estados Unidos y Nueva Zelanda cuentan con las cooperativas mas potentes del mundo, a la altura de las multinacionales mas importantes de la agroalimentacion. EnglishThese four countries have an extraordinarily developed and market-oriented agri-food sector wherein the cooperative movement has developed accordingly. In fact, it can be said that the degree of development in the sector is a direct consequence of the development and implementation of the cooperative movement. Moreover, the productive structure of these countries is based on farms that are on average considerably larger than in Europe, but this does not mean that producers don’t need to join cooperatives and, except in the case of Australia, where there have been no incentive policies throughout its history, both Canada, the United States and New Zealand all have the most powerful cooperatives in the world, right up there with the major agri-food multinationals
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".