Aerial ropeway system — feasibility study in Doha, Qatar
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerial ropeway systems, also called gondolas and aerial cable cars, are amongst driverless transportation modes, which are progressively drawing attention in promoting tourism. Aerial ropeway systems have been operated in touristic spots (e.g., over lakes, rivers, and hilly lands) in several countries. Passengers can enjoy a view from above and experience a stress-free and reliable trip. Furthermore, those systems can be exploited as public transportation in urbanized and populated regions. The objective of this article is to investigate the viability of implementing a gondola line over Doha Bay in Qatar as a tourist attraction from marketing, economic, and environmental points of view. In this study, the associated costs (capital, maintenance, and operating) of implementing a monocable detachable gondola technology (MDG) are estimated using international best practices. The economic analysis outcome demonstrates that the revenues generated from fares could offset the required capital investment as well as operating and maintenance costs and hence the proposed gondola could be economically attractive for investors. Moreover, no significant negative impacts and footprint on the environment are anticipated at the exploitation phase of the gondola.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it