MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W584068730

Prince Rupert to Twin Cities: Potential Value Added of New Intermodal Freight Service

2007· article· en· W584068730 on OpenAlex
Richard D. Stewart, Adolph Ojard, Xiu‐Bin Wang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 86th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTwin citiesMetropolitan areaPort (circuit theory)Service (business)Transport engineeringGeographyEngineeringEconomyEconomicsArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the potential impact of a new Canadian container port being developed in Prince Rupert, British Columbia on the Minneapolis, St. Paul Minnesota metropolitan region (the Twin Cities). The new Prince Rupert route has potential to serve the Twin Cities through two gateways; Chicago, Illinois and the Twin Ports of Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin. The advantages and disadvantages of using each gateway are discussed. The paper examines on both routes the issues of: transit time, terminal availability, drayage, corridor congestion, asset utilization, interest inventory costs, freight rates, growth potential, circuitry and transloading.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.297 · 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