MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417055464 · doi:10.1061/9780784479919.030

Retrofit of an Existing Container Yard to Accommodate Automated Stacking Cranes—Manzanillo International Terminal, Panama

2016· article· en· W2417055464 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Ozolin, Christopher B. Cornell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsBerger (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYardContainer (type theory)Terminal (telecommunication)AutomationComputer scienceTransport engineeringEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in technology and information management systems have led to the evolution of automated stacking cranes (ASCs) for container handing operations. ASCs have become the current trend in new container yard development because automation increases container yard operational efficiency, improves safety, and can increase container stacking density. While ASCs have several operational advantages over traditional container handling equipment, the civil, electrical, and data infrastructures necessary to support this type of equipment are substantially different. Due to the unique infrastructure needs of an ASC operation, implementation of this technology has been primarily confined to greenfield sites or new terminal redevelopment. As the benefits of ASC operation become more recognized, existing owners of traditional container yards will seek to maintain competitive advantage in the container handling market and introduce automation into existing and fully operational container yards. The purpose of this paper is to highlight some of the major challenges and lessons learned in traditional container yard retrofit for automation through an ASC project completed by Manzanillo International Terminal (MIT) in Manzanillo, Panama.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207