MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluating Logistical Efficiency Using Data Envelopment Analysis: The Case of Trois-Rivières’ Harbour Elevators

2002· article· en· W2183046939 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSupply Chain Forum an International Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElevator Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElevatorData envelopment analysisHarbourProcess (computing)Product (mathematics)Operations researchComputer scienceDecompositionEngineeringStatisticsMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper puts forward a longitudinal process/product decomposition framework for the relative efficiency analysis of the logistics process. This framework relies on the linear programming technique of data envelopment analysis (DEA) and was applied in a study conducted at the Trois-Rivieres’ harbour elevators. The activities of the elevators are broken down into two sub-processes and two product categories for which specific, oriented and global efficiencies evolutions are monitored over a 25-month period on a rolling window of 12 months at a time.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.263 · 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