MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136030077 · doi:10.3141/2289-17

Methodological Framework for Analyzing Ability of Freight Rail Customers to Forecast Short-Term Volumes Accurately

2012· article· en· W2136030077 on OpenAlexaff
Stephan Moll, Ulrich Weidmann, Andrew Nash

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransport and Logistics Innovations
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckFlexibility (engineering)Transport engineeringBenchmark (surveying)Operations researchDemand forecastingScheduling (production processes)Traffic managementRail freight transportComputer sciencePlan (archaeology)EngineeringOperations managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The freight transport business is extremely challenging for railways because transport by truck has intrinsic advantages in flexibility and quality. Providing freight customers with flexible scheduling is particularly difficult because optimizing an interconnected rail operating plan is more difficult than arranging for shipment by truck. In this environment it would be helpful if shippers could provide railways with accurate demand forecasts. However, the ability to forecast rail freight transport differs strongly by shipper and commodity type. The goal of this research is to develop a methodological framework to understand better the characteristics that influence the ability of freight shippers to prepare accurate forecasts of rail demand. This information will help railways increase productivity by improving their ability to develop optimized schedules. It will help railways decide when to rely on shipper forecasts and provide a benchmark for identifying shippers that can provide accurate forecasts. The paper describes the methodological framework and presents results from a case study application to illustrate the practical applicability of the proposed framework.

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.408
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.064 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicTransport and Logistics InnovationsFrench-language works237,207