MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of the Benefits of Transnational Transportation Projects

2006· preprint· en· W3121978843 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Economics · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvestment (military)CommodityBusinessDistribution (mathematics)Bridge (graph theory)CommerceAgricultural economicsEconomicsInternational tradeFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper an analytical framework has been developed to evaluate the primary beneficiaries of cargo traffic generated by transnational transport projects. In the transportation economics literature, the economic impact of infrastructure projects on cargo traffic has not been developed as fully as for passenger traffic. In much of the previous literature it is often assumed that consumers of the traded goods would receive the full benefits from the reduction in logistics and transportation costs. This paper has shown that whether the goods are traded internationally or regionally is a key factor in the allocation of the economic benefits arising from the reduction in the cost of cargo transportation. The analytical framework developed in the paper is applied to the evaluation of the impacts of the proposed Buenos Aires-Colonia binational bridge project.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.140 · 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