Bibliographic record
Abstract
In early 2011 work began anew on a study of proposed regional rail service linking the North Puget Sound communities of Bellingham and Everett. The concept is to run self-propelled diesel multiple units on BNSF Railway mainline tracks. The new rail service would depart southbound in the early morning from Bellingham and link with Sounder commuter trains departing Everett for Seattle. The reverse would occur in the evening peak period. The concept has been studied since 2005. Fundamental to such a service is the provision of sufficient capacity on the BNSF tracks to ensure fluid operations for the new service and the lines’ current users: BNSF freight trains and the Amtrak Cascades sponsored by the Washington State Department of Transportation. An operations simulation to validate the required improvements was conducted with BNSF in 2007. However, since then train operating patterns have changed: more northbound BNSF coal and grain trains are using the line, and a second Cascade train has been extended from Bellingham to Vancouver, BC. In 2010 the Washington State Legislature passed a transportation budget which included funds for a review of the North Sound regional rail concept. WSDOT administered the analysis, which required an update of the earlier operations simulation. BNSF agreed to participate. The rail operations study was completed in May 2011. The findings: the existing and planned infrastructure on the line can handle the addition of a new regional rail service without triggering major impacts on other line users.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".