MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027564705 · doi:10.1680/tran.2001.147.2.61

CrossRail: Scope, background and feasibility

2001· article· en· W2027564705 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. C. Fergusson

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)TrainQuarter (Canadian coin)Work (physics)Transport engineeringEngineeringCivil engineeringGeographyTelecommunicationsArchaeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proposals for an east–west railway linking existing railways across central London have been examined on many occasions over the last 100 years, culminating in the present CrossRail scheme, recommended by the Central London Rail Study in 1989. 1 CrossRail, linking counties east and west of London with the City and the West End, will be operated by suburban trains up to twelve cars in length carrying a quarter of a million passengers a day. Twin tunnels will be built beneath central London from west of Paddington to Bethnal Green with five new subsurface stations at key locations. Outside of London, trains will run mainly on existing lines to Reading, Aylesbury and Shenfield with new and extended platforms where required. This first paper outlines the scope of the project, the historical background, initial engineering feasibility work and preparation for the Parliamentary Private Bill.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.006

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - TransportSame topic3D Modeling in Geospatial ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207