MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2785667696 · doi:10.37419/lr.v4.i2.5

Where We're Going, We'll Need Roads! Building the Bridge to the Future

2017· article· en· W2785667696 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jessica R. Lesnau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Government (linguistics)International tradeBattlePolitical scienceBusinessEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a world where global economies are increasingly interdependent, the United States, and its North American counterparts, Canada and Mexico, are booming sources of international trade. Now, more than ever, global competitiveness necessitates developments in U.S. infrastructure, especially at major border crossings where congestion and poor infrastructure create bottlenecks interfering with the free movement of goods. Questions pertaining to international border crossings circle the debate at the most crucial international border crossing in North America: the Ambassador Bridge, which spans the Detroit River between Detroit, Michigan, and Windsor, Ontario. A legal battle rages over the proposed construction of a new publicly owned bridge that will compete with the eighty-six-year-old privately owned bridge. Many questions surround this topic, including whether the United States may allow the construction of a bridge that competes with a private individual’s livelihood. Is there a compelling case for a government taking in favor of public infrastructure? Should a private individual be able to own a major international border crossing? Additionally, in anticipation of construction of a new bridge, what will be the implications for the community that must give up its property to make way for the construction? This Comment will focus on the conflict over the construction of the New International Trade Crossing (NITC), also known as the “Bridge to the Future,” in competition with the Ambassador Bridge and its relevance to the conversation of border infrastructure. It will further demonstrate some of the pitfalls in the private ownership of an international border crossing—as well as some that inhere in government ownership—arguing for a new infrastructure model that promotes collaboration between the public and private sectors. Ultimately, this Article will argue that, like the NITC, future border infrastructure projects should be developed through the use of public-private partnerships (hereinafter “P3s”) to promote North American trade development.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.018
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0150.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Law and Aviation→French-language works237,207→