Evaluating Container Ship Routes: A Case For Choosing Between The Panama Canal And The U.S. Land Bridge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For container traffic from the Far East to Europe, shipping routes and transportation choices are about to be taken to a new competitive level. Ship sizes have increased through time, yet the Panama Canal has remained unchanged, struggling to keep pace with larger size traffic. Over that same time span, more logistical pressure has been placed on the U.S. as a land bridge for container traffic from Asia to Europe. However, the canal is set to open new locks to accommodate today’s biggest container ships, creating more choices for container traffic to many eastern Atlantic ports. In our work, we investigate choices for container ship transportation from the eastern Pacific to the western Atlantic based solely on time. Choices include traveling through the Panama Canal or using the U.S. as a land bridge (via truck and rail car). A breakeven methodology, given vessel size, is employed to discriminate between paths. Implications for decision-making are then presented and discussed. Interested parties of our work might include those investigating multi-modal integration opportunities, those seeking transportation efficiencies in water, truck and rail, and students as a case assignment in Transportation and Logistics courses.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".