MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888749701 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.236761

Case Study Analysis for Sector Research and Teaching Support

2016· article· en· W6888749701 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCover (algebra)Public sectorScientific literatureResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of case studies in dealing with problems of the food sector is gaining increasingly attention in the scientific community. Case-based reasoning supports as a scientific approach the analysis of problems, relationships, behavior, and development directions of the sector and may contribute to understanding the sector’s opportunities and abilities in meeting the challenges of the future. This editorial provides a short introduction into the case study approach and links it to the publications in the special issue which cover case studies from the US, Canada, South America, Europe, and Africa.

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)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.176
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.176
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0180.021
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.005

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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.107 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207