MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136483189 · doi:10.3141/2300-13

Developing an Empirical and Risk-Based Revenue Forecasting Model for NAV CANADA

2012· article· en· W2136483189 on OpenAlexaffabout
J Paul Cripwell

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsRoyal Canadian Navy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueAviationAir traffic controlOperations researchEconometric modelTransport engineeringComputer scienceEconomicsFinanceEngineeringEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate forecasting of aviation activity is necessary for NAV CANADA, because the act that created the company stipulates that revenues must equal cost commitments related to the provision of air navigation services. Accurate forecasting of revenue is an important early step in determining the cost commitments that can be met in upcoming fiscal years. Traditional econometric forecasting techniques are of a long-term nature and do not consider the seasonality of traffic, nor do they provide the required detail at the level of the individual month. For these and other reasons, empirical forecasting methods were developed as the primary forecasting approach for the company. This paper describes the selection and development of the empirical model, which is based on the Holt–Winters multiplicative method, for the air traffic that overflies Canadian airspace on routes between North America and Europe. A second part of the modeling process is the application of risk analysis not only to replace current scenario-based methods but also to improve and augment them. The methodology will then be applied to the two other markets, Asia and the Far East and Alaska, with eventual expansion to Canadian air traffic, though they are not discussed in this paper.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.333
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.066 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207