Bibliographic record
Abstract
The advent of the era of mobility, deregulation, airline alliances, airport privatization and recent tragic events have led to the need for an analysis of air transport – a sector often considered by economists as being marginal. The objective of this thesis is to carry out a study of Toronto and Montreal airports taking into consideration the changes and challenges related to the restructuring of air transport. First, we examine the eco-political and statutory context of the sector; a quantitative analysis of the network managers and air carriers in eastern Canada and their growth strategies. Second, we present a qualitative analysis of the leading protagonists in air transport and we attempt to define an ecostrategic approach by calculating the direct, indirect and induced impacts of the two airports. Then, we approach this reconstruction process interactively via a morphological analysis; the scenario method and identification of the strategies of the actors involved. Next, a path-breaking analysis takes intoaccount the more unpredictable side of the future, in particular with regard to the new situation on the air transport market and the challenges that this implies in terms of unstable supply, increasingly complex demand and new urban development. Finally, we propound possible criteria for the reorganisation of air transport in eastern Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".