MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102011019

Competing Technologies and Economic Opportunities for Northern Logistics: The Airship Solution

2009· article· en· W2102011019 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barry E. Prentice, Stuart Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvestment (military)BusinessArcticProduct (mathematics)Climate changeEnvironmental economicsNatural resource economicsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economic development in Northern Canada is constrained by the cost of transportation and logistics. The limited transportation options available increase the direct costs of shipping and add to the indirect costs of inventories. Concerns about climate change impacts, delays in environmental approvals and uncertainty regarding First Nations land claims further increase investment risk. As a result, the transportation solution offered by airships is gathering increased interest in northern Canada. The purpose of the paper is to examine the market opportunity for a new generation of airships in Arctic logistics. The paper begins with an overview of the logistical options available and potential roles for airships. Subsequently, airship technology development is examined with respect to the product life-cycle theory and the observation of tipping points. The paper concludes with some thoughts on necessary steps to make this technology available in northern Canada.

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)0.002
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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich)Same topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207