MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W844987822

Weekly Outlook: USDA Grain Stocks and Acreage Estimates Supportive for Corn and Soybean Prices

2015· article· en· W844987822 on OpenAlex
Darrel Good

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuefarmdoc daily · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSowingQuarter (Canadian coin)CropResidualAgricultural economicsEnvironmental scienceAgricultural scienceAgronomyEconomicsMathematicsGeographyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The estimate of June 1 stocks is most important for corn since it reveals the magnitude of feed and residual use during the previous quarter. This year, however, the soybean stocks estimate is of more interest than usual since both the December 1, 2014 and March 1, 2015 stocks estimates revealed an unusually large residual disappearance in the first half of the year and hinted that the 2014 crop may have been overestimated. The June acreage estimates are always important since they differ from intentions in the March Prospective Plantings report and provide an update of production prospects. The estimates are of extreme interest this year due to the seeming under-statement of total crop acreage in the March intentions report and the delay in soybean planting. That delay, however, also creates more than the usual uncertainty about how final planted and harvested acreage estimates will compare to June intentions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.217 · 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