MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113765225 · doi:10.1080/03081060.2015.1059121

Incorporating uncertainty and risk in transportation investment decision-making

2015· article· en· W2113765225 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sabyasachee Mishra, Snehamay Khasnabis, Subrat Kumar Swain

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Planning and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of ToledoMichigan Department of TransportationU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsInvestment (military)Transport engineeringPoison controlBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringEconomicsActuarial scienceOperations researchEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a framework for addressing uncertainty and risk for large-scale transportation investments involving public–private participation. Demand, fare/toll and demand responsive costs are considered in the uncertainty analysis. Uncertainty analysis provides information on economic feasibility of the project. A set of relaxation policies is proposed to form various Ownership, Tenure and Governance (OTG) strategies reflecting the nature and level of participation by the public and private entity. A Monte Carlo Simulation-based Value at Risk is used to quantify risk. Finally, a methodology is proposed to integrate uncertainty and risk. The framework is tested on the proposed multibillion dollar Detroit River International Crossing connecting the cities of Detroit in the USA with Windsor in Canada. The analysis provides insights to probable outcomes for this transportation infrastructure investment under different OTG scenarios.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Planning and TechnologySame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207