Wheat in the World Economy. A Guide to Wheat Studies of the Food Research Institute - Part I. Abstracts A. Developments in the wheat world, 1923-24 to 1943-44
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The World Wheat Situation, 1923-24 J. S. DAVIS and others Dec '24 I (1),1-59 High yields, bumper crops, abundant supplies, record international shipments, low prices, and very low purchasing power of wheat were outstanding features of the world wheat situation in 1923-24.Favored by abundance of cheap wheat, low ocean freight rates, and economic improvement abroad, the international movement of wheat and flour proved unexpectedly and extraordinarily large.Shipments were heavy both to Europe, which had large grain crops, and to ex-Europe, especially Japan and China.Canada's net exports of 348 million bushels were of record size, Argentina's about half as large.Soviet Russia, with fair crops of grain for the first time since the revolution, skimped on domestic consumption and exported, through the government monopoly, substantial quantities of rye, wheat, and barley.United' States wheat farmers, in the third year of postwar agricultural depression, had a very bad season.The domestic crop was the smallest since 1917, and high-quality hard wheats were so scarce that considerable Canadian grain was imported over the 30-cent duty.The United States remained by far the largest exporter of flour, but her net exports of wheat and flour combined were the smallest since the war.Feed use here was unusually large.World wheat prices started upward in the spring of 1924 and rose sharply in June-July, under the joint influence of increased European purchases and deteriorating crop prospects in Europe and Canada.The acute emergency among American wheat growers was ended by good yields, harvests, and prices in 1924.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.025 |
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".