MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403286106 · doi:10.1016/j.trd.2024.104453

Meteorological risk assessment of Canadian transcontinental freight railway

2024· article· en· W4403286106 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mehrnoush Bahramimehr, Golam Kabir

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Part D Transport and Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransport engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Railway transportation, integral to Canada’s supply chain, is recognized for its reliability and safety, yet its complexity introduces various risks. In this study, a meteorological risk assessment of the Canadian transcontinental freight railway is performed using a comprehensive spatial analysis. Flood (areas prone to flood risk across the province), rain (maximum daily precipitation in mm), snow (maximum snowfall in cm), minimum temperature (minimum temperature in Celsius), and wind (maximum gust speed in Km/h) have been selected as factors to generate meteorological risk maps of the Transcontinental Freight Canadian National Railway (CN) for the Saskatchewan and Ontario provinces. The study generated five integrated risk maps, varying in factor weighting approaches, including equal weight, score-based weighting, expert opinion-based Analytical Hierarchy Process, and seasonal considerations for both warm and cold seasons. These risk maps demonstrate hotspots and hazardous areas that require more attention and planning to maintain the continuity of the supply chain. The results of this study can be used to enhance safety, reduce service disruptions, and ensure the smooth operation of the railway network.

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)0.005
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Part D Transport and EnvironmentSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207