Identification and Analysis of Barriers that Impact the Sustainable Development of Brazilian Cabotage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brazil has ideal conditions for the large-scale use of cabotage cargo transportation: a vast coastline with almost 7,400 km, approximately 70% of the population resident in a coastal range of up to 200 km from the coast and a strong concentration of activities economic along the coast. However, there is an absolute domain of road modal for the transportation of goods, and cabotage is underused. The purpose of the study was to raise the main barriers that negatively impact the performance of Brazilian cabotage. To this end, it was used to bibliographic and documentary research, based on studies already published in journals, doctoral theses, master's dissertations, congress annals, technical reports and research on government-related government agencies sites, navigation companies and entities related to cabotage. The main barriers that contribute to the low use of cabotage in Brazil were identified and analyzed, as well as possible alternatives of solution for sustainable development of this mode of transport. Such a study will certainly serve as subsidies for the definition of public policies aimed at better use of Brazilian cabotage, as well as to encourage navigation companies to invest more in the transport of goods by cabotage, in order to contribute to the reduction of trucks on highways Brazilian and for environmental preservation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".