Britain's future corn supply: foreign or Canadian?.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
S adverse balance of trade has long been \JT a special subject of discussion, some regarding it as of no serious importance, while others recognise in it symptoms of commercial decline.The steady increase of this unfavourable balance not only in volume, but in its proportion to exports and to the in- crease of population, is specially deserving of attention.Twenty years ago, the total exports of one hundred and fifty-six millions sterling were eighty-seven per cent, of the amount of the imports, while in 1877 the exports were but sixty-four per cent, of the amount of the imports.Taking two decaded periods, 1859-68, and 1868-77, the average of the first period was, imports, two hundred and fifty millions, exports, one hundred and ninety-six millions, or seven- ty-eight and one-third per cent.; and of the second period, imports, three hundred and forty-six millions, exports, two hundred and seventy millions, or seventy-eight and one-third per cent., being a slight gain, but comparing with 1876 or 1877, greatly to the disadvantage of the latter part of the period.When viewed in relation to population, the first period shows imports per capita, of eight pounds, eight shillings, exports, five pounds, four shillings, or sixty-two per cent.; and in the latter period, imports, ten pounds, sixteen shillings, and sixpence, exports, six pounds, fifteen shillings and eightpence,or sixty- three per cent-a gain of one per cent.On the last two years of the period (1876-77) the exports only average fifty-three per cent, of the amount of the imports per capita.These large and increasing imports consist chiefly of two classes, Food Staples, and the Raw Materials of Manufactures.During the
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 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.138 | 0.019 |
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".