Evaluating the impacts of infrastructure improvements based on link criticality and network performance: A case study of the trucking industry in the province of Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A reliable transportation network is essential to maintaining and growing a region's economic productivity through the movement of goods, a significant proportion of which is moved by truck. Criticalities in the network should be identified and mitigation measures implemented to ensure that minimal negative impacts arise from link disruptions. Using criticality measures that account for network, freight flow, and economic characteristics, a comparison is made among locations of highly critical segments in the province of Ontario, Canada, and infrastructure improvement projects planned by the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario. Four highway capacity expansion segments are explored through a scenario analysis, comparing the effects resulting from their implementation to a status quo base case. Freight and passenger flows are forecasted to the year 2036 for the analysis. A comparison is made among the scenarios to assess the network‐wide impacts of each segment's improvements with respect to vehicle and shipment value flows, travel time, greenhouse gas emissions, and each segment's average operating conditions. Of the four segments compared, the improvements of Highway 404 appear to provide the most significant benefits with respect to network performance. Such analysis can inform policy measures for the prioritization of infrastructure improvements to address network criticalities .
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".