An Examination of the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Maritime Port Efficiency and Businesses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the impact of AI on the Port efficiency of selected ports in Europe, Asia, and North America. Inefficiency at the Ports has a detrimental effect on importers and exporters. The study framework relies on the Benchmarking theory. Research has shown that port delays have a negative multiplier effect on the economy. This study examines the implications of AI on the port efficiency of selected smart ports in the industry, such as Singapore, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Antwerp Bruges, Montreal, Long Beach, Valencia, and Barcelona. These ports serve as a benchmark for traditional sub-Saharan African ports. The implication of AI on Port Efficiency will serve as an impetus and a benchmark for other ports in Africa to consider AI a plausible solution to the long-standing inefficiency problems plaguing ports in sub-Saharan Africa. The Malmquist Productivity Index measures these ports' efficiency and productivity for 2017-2023. The result showed that four ports, Hamburg, Singapore, Valencia, and Rotterdam, had a Malmquist Productivity Index greater than 1. These ports can be used as a benchmark for sub-Saharan African Ports that have yet to transform into smart ports. The research developed a generic transformational framework to guide traditional ports.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".