MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046349969 · doi:10.1287/trsc.1100.0339

A Tactical Planning Model for Railroad Transportation of Dangerous Goods

2010· article· en· W2046349969 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalMcGill UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrainDangerous goodsTransportation planningTransport engineeringOperations researchTruckGenetic algorithmFlow networkPopulationYardHazardous wasteComponent (thermodynamics)EngineeringComputer scienceMathematical optimizationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Railroad transportation of hazardous materials did not receive as much attention as highway transportation in the academic literature, although comparable volumes are shipped via these two transport modes in North America and Europe. In this paper, we present an optimization methodology for the railroad tactical planning problem with risk and cost objectives. We determine the routes to be used for each shipment, the yard activities, and the number of trains of different types needed in the network. The transport risk assessment component of our model incorporates the differentiating characteristics of railroad operations. We develop a memetic algorithm-based solution methodology, which combines genetic and local searches, to solve the biobjective model. The railroad infrastructure in the midwestern United States is used as a basis for generating problem instances of the size encountered in real life. Our analyses of the solutions of instances indicate that it is possible to achieve significant reductions in population exposure without incurring unacceptable increases in operational costs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.308 · 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