MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7120634318

Relationship between national and international wood prices

2008· dissertation· pt· W7120634318 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languagept
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranger causalityCointegrationWork (physics)Order (exchange)ArbitrageShock (circulatory)Market price
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work analyses the Canadian sawn wood price impact on the price building of the sawn wood in booth São Paulo and Pará states Price conveyance between those states was also assessed KPSS tests results show that all price series are order 1I stationary Johansen`s test results show that none of the price series is co-integrated It can be concluded that there is no special integration between Canadian and Brazilian States` (São Paulo and Pará) wood markets that is a demand shock in any of those markets is not likely to affect wood prices in other markets Another conclusion led to by Granger´s Causality Test is that Granger arisen by Canadian prices influence on Pará´s prices the same way as Granger Pará`s prices influence upon São Paulo`s prices These findings show the market view since Canadian the world´s main sawn wood exporter has influenced upon Pará a great Brazilian sawn wood producer Yet because São Paulo´s civil construction consumes Pará´s wood in large scale Pará´s prices have great influence on São Paulo´s Therefore results suggest that Brazilian wood market in not effective at long term as there in no evidence of long term co-integration what does not litter allow either arbitrage mechanisms or unique prices law to work as they have been expected.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicAgricultural and Food SciencesFrench-language works237,207