Productivity Trends in the Canadian Transport Sector: An Overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent decades, the overall growth in productivity of many subsectors of the Canadian transportation and warehousing sector has been above average. In particular, while labour productivity (real GDP per worker) grew an average of 0.64 per cent per year between 2000 and 2014 in the transportation and warehousing sector, labour productivity grew an average of 1.83 per cent per year in the truck transportation subsector, 3.25 per cent per year in the air transportation subsector and 2.09 per cent in the train transportation subsector for the same period. Conversely, in the urban transit subsector, labour productivity decreased an average of 0.76 per cent per year between 2000 and 2014. This report provides a detailed analysis of output, input and productivity trends in four subsectors of the Canadian transportation and warehousing sector. It also examines drivers of the productivity growth for each subsector as well as policies that could enable faster growth. Given the impact that the transportation sector has on many Canadian industries as well as the Canadian economy, maintaining productivity growth is important.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.028 | 0.063 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".