MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W582678641

PEARSON AIRPORT RAIL LINK PROPOSED

2000· article· en· W582678641 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D Westell

Bibliographic record

VenueRCC's public works financing · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntownInternational airportGovernment (linguistics)Plan (archaeology)BusinessTransport engineeringService (business)FinanceEngineeringMarketingGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Five consortia approached Canada's federal government with plans to build a privately operated rail link between downtown Toronto's Union Station and Pearson International Airport at the city's edge, even before Ottawa formally announced the project. That announcement came June 7, 2000, when the city finally closed a deal to buy the building from the two railways that own it. Ottawa was waiting for that purchase so both ends of the airport line would be in public hands. The airport, which is working on a new terminal to open in 2004, has agreed to incorporate the rail link. Canadian National Railroad, which owns the tracks, has agreed in principle to let the new service use them. The purchase of the station, a city objective for 50 years, will lead to a massive renovation, and, the city hopes, start the ball rolling in an ambitious plan to redevelop a great swath of the derelict waterfront. The city estimates total renovations could cost Cdn$200 million, but expects leasing 200,000 sq ft will offset all renovation costs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1180.031

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRCC's public works financingSame topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207