Transborder Surface Movements Of Nafta CommoditiesTruck vs Rail
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The boom in NAFTA trade has created a corresponding surge in the demand for surface transportation capacity to move the goods. So far, trucks have provided the major capacity to meet the requirements. Intensive lobbying efforts are being made for authority to utilized longer and heavier trucks along certain U.S. highway corridors to move the imports and exports from and to Canada and Mexico. In addition, a serious debate has erupted over allowing Mexican trucks to travel significant distances within the U.S. The surge in surface NAFTA based commodity movement via truck has serious economic, social and infrastructure consequences.The paper examines the surface transborder export-import flows between the U.S. and Canada and the U.S. and Mexico. Delineating these flows by the types of commodities, origins and destinations, and modal movements is an essential ingredient in any attempt to determine if the transportation infrastructure is being and will be utilized in optimum manner. Specifically, the paper finds that the overwhelming percentage of commodity movements is by truck regardless of distance traveled with very little moving by rail. The paper looks at the potential for commodity adaptability and flows to rail movement. Environmental considerations are also integrated into the trade-offs. Cost and service of trucking versus rail are the key ingredients to the conclusions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".