MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965332163 · doi:10.1068/a37421

Rethinking the Port

2006· article· en· W1965332163 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Olivier, Brian Slack

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and Space · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPort (circuit theory)Container (type theory)Economic geographyIndustrial organizationEmpirical evidenceBusinessEconomyEconomicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural change in container port operation and ownership over the past decade has seen the emergence of port-operating transnational corporations (TNCs). The emergence of the port-operating TNC requires a fundamental epistemological shift in reconceptualising the port, from a single, fixed, spatial entity to a network of terminals operating under a corporate logic. This shift is twofold. First, because under port reforms corporate entry occurs overwhelmingly at the terminal level, the terminal rather than the port becomes the relevant spatial unit of analysis. Second, although spatial theories of the firm represent a longstanding stream in economic geography, such theories have yet to find general application in port studies. Consequently, in addressing the interface between transport and economic geographies, the authors suggest a geography of the port-operating TNC as a potential bridge. A decade of privatization in the port sector has rendered the industry an appropriate empirical ground for enquiry into spatial theories of the firm. Evidence from Asian port systems and business networks are put forward in sketching a new research agenda.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.027
Scholarly communication0.0170.038
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations173
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and SpaceSame topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207