MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1507370507

Passenger Rail Planner's Guide 2006

2006· article· en· W1507370507 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Greg Gormick

Bibliographic record

VenueRailway age · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemphisMiamiAtlantaMetropolitan areaPhoenixSalt lakeLight rail transitBaton rougeTransport engineeringArchaeologyEngineeringPublic transportHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Passenger Rail Planner's Guide for 2007 begins with an overview of the state of North America's rail passenger and rail transit systems. It notes that U.S. ridership statistics for light rail rose 5.4%, followed by 3.2% for commuter rail, and and 2.8% for heavy rail. The guide includes a chart identifying FY 2008 funding for new starts projects. Analyses are presented for Amtrak, including an essay titled Redefining Amtrak's role in the Northeast, and Via Rail in Canada. The guide then presents updates to systems in Boston, Connecticut, the New York Metropolitan Area, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area, Raleigh, Charlotte, Atlanta, Tampa, Miami, Buffalo, Cleveland, Chicago, Minneapolis/St. Paul, St. Louis, Nashville, Memphis, Little Rock, New Orleans, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Austin, Denver, Salt Lake City, Albuquerque, Phoenix, San Diego, Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Stockton, Sacramento, Portland, Seattle-Tacoma, Vancouver, B.C., Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3540.258

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.178 · 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.

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRailway ageSame topicRailway Systems and Energy EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207