MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FORECASTS OF THE AIR TRANSPORT INDUSTRY AFTER THE COVID-19 CRISIS

2020· article· en· W3091493995 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ionuț-Claudiu Popa, Iuliana Cetină

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv Economics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir transportCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BusinessQuarter (Canadian coin)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakFinancial crisisSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)InsolvencyPandemicProfit (economics)FinanceOutbreakEconomicsAeronauticsGeographyEngineeringMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The air transport services industry is one of the most affected branches of the global crisis industry caused by the new COVID- 19 coronavirus. After a sustained growth in the last decade, this industry came to report declines of almost 50% at the end of the first quarter of 2020. Given that no one can approximate how long the global pandemic will end, it is very difficult to predict how long the air transport services will return to January 2020, as well as how many operators will declare insolvency or how many they will be able to adapt their strategies so that they can make a profit. Part of global airline operators have managed to adapt their activity by operating mainly cargo flights, but even so, a very large part of the fleet remained on the ground. Through this article to followed highlighting the situation in which air transport services are found, almost half a year after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic by highlighting the amounts that some European countries have not received while issuing forecasts on how in which the staged resumption of flights will take place and how the air operators will manage to follow common return policies or will develop their strategies.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv EconomicsSame topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207