MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010107133 · doi:10.3141/2378-08

Structural Commodity Generation Model that Uses Public Data

2013· article· en· W2010107133 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Ranaiefar, Joseph Y.J. Chow, Daniel Rodríguez-Román, Pedro Camargo, Stephen G. Ritchie

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban and Freight Transport Logistics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsExplanatory powerCommodityRegression analysisComputer scienceAggregate (composite)Elasticity (physics)EconomicsOperations researchEngineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freight forecasting models are data intensive and require many explanatory variables to be accurate. One problem, particularly in the United States, is that public data sources are mostly at highly aggregate geographic levels but models with more disaggregate geographic levels are required for regional freight transportation planning. A second problem is that supply chain effects are often ignored or modeled with economic input–output models that lack explanatory power. This study addressed these challenges with a structural equation modeling approach that was not confined to a specific spatial structure, as spatial regression models would have been, and allowed correlations between commodities. A model for structural commodity generation that was based on freight analysis framework was specified, estimated, and shown to provide a better fit to the data than did independent regression models for each commodity. Three features of the model are discussed: indirect effects, supply chain elasticity, and intrazonal supply–demand interactions. A goal programming method was used with imputed data to validate the geographic scalability of the model.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.438
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.067 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicUrban and Freight Transport LogisticsFrench-language works237,207