MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099507536

National Industrial Hemp Strategy ii March 2008Executive Summary Growth of the Canadian Industrial Hemp Sector

2012· article· en· W7099507536 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismProduction (economics)Oil productionIndustrial productionIndustrialisationAgricultureDomestic market
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The history of hemp cultivation is as old as the history of civilization. In North America, hemp was a crucial crop during the colonial period, and it continued to be produced right up to and through the Second World War. A combination of regulatory pressures and changing public perceptions around drug use led to the disappearance of domestic hemp cultivation in North America in the years following WW II. In 1998, Canada joined the large international community of hemp producers by permitting the production of industrial hemp, under a carefully monitored regulatory process. While the growth of the Canadian industrial hemp sector over the past decade has been uneven and at times fraught with challenges, as would be expected from a fledgling industry, there is considerable cause for optimism: The market for hemp seed materials for human health, nutrition, and personal care applications is strong and growing. Market price for a drum of conventionally grown hemp oil is approximately $1600 Cdn, with organic hem oil fetching in the neighbourhood of $2500 a drum (Spring 2008).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.009

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.088 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical History and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207