MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983348782

Medium Term Outlook for Canadian Agriculture 2011-2021

2017· article· en· W6983348782 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsAgricultureMedium termClimate changeAgricultural policyTerm (time)Baseline (sea)Benchmark (surveying)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this document is to describe the features of the Medium Term Outlook (MTO) covering the period 2011 to 2021. The MTO is a plausible future for the international and domestic agri-food sectors based on current policies in Canada and other countries as of Fall 2011. It serves as a benchmark for discussion and scenario analysis. The outlook makes specific assumptions and outlines their implications. Since it assumes that policies remain unchanged in the future it is therefore an extrapolation of what could occur based on current trends and underlying macroeconomic projections. In particular, there are no assumptions made regarding the outcome of the Doha round of trade negotiations. It also assumes no impact from climate change and from policy to mitigate climate change nor significant animal disease outbreaks or unusual climatic conditions over the period of the outlook. The starting point of the MTO is world agricultural commodities price projection based on the OECD/FAO Agricultural Outlook for 2009/2019 adjusted with more recent information. The Canadian macro-economic forecasts are from the Conference Board of Canada outlook published in September 2011 In addition, short-term price forecasts have been updated using United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) projections released in November 2011.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207