MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7093474248

Review of <i> Trails and Trials: Markets and Land Use in the Alberta Beef Cattle Industry, 1881-1948</i> By Max Foran

2004· article· W7093474248 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInsecta mundi · 2004
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPolitical Influence and Corporate Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationBeef cattleLand useAgricultureOrder (exchange)Key (lock)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Max Foran's Trails and Trials does a superb job of filling a conspicuous gap in Alberta's agricultural history. By covering the period 1881-1948, the book extends the standard accounts of Alberta's ranching history well into the twentieth century. And it expands on traditional ranch history themes with its clear and consistent focus on the importance of cattle exports in relation to Canada's small domestic market and on the importance of markets in understanding land use change. Foran periodizes and organizes his story clearly. Each chapter follows a similar structure with sections and subsections describing major market and policy developments and their land use implications, making the book easy to use as a research source and keeping the reader attentive to key themes. The book's thoroughgoing documentation shows Foran's mastery of Alberta's historical record and will prove useful for future Great Plains historians.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.019
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsecta mundiSame topicPolitical Influence and Corporate StrategiesFrench-language works237,207