MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W600178017

Comparison of Five Green Trucking Programs Across Canada

2013· article· en· W600178017 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jairo Viáfara, Pd Larson

Bibliographic record

Venue2013 CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA - TRANSPORTATION: BETTER - FASTER - SAFER · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateLegislationBusinessGreenhouse gasSustainabilityNova scotiaEngineeringPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The industry is a leading consumer of fuel and producer of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, inspiring federal and provincial governments to enact legislation and promote new technologies. This paper evaluates and compares five provincial green trucking programs; from Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Nova Scotia and Ontario. These programs were funded by the provincial governments and administered by various industry groups and non-profit agencies. Green programs emanated from the Canadian Trucking Alliance's enviroTruck program, focusing on GHG emissions, fuel consumption and working conditions in heavy-duty across Canada. Each program was launched independently and had unique scope and mandate. This comparison looks at the following factors: stakeholders (e.g. funders, administrators and beneficiaries); number of tractors and trailers submitted for consideration by the industry; number of approved tractors and trailers by the programs; investment in technologies; and fuel conservation and emission reduction estimates. The paper presents key results from each program. It also offers public policy recommendations to facilitate improved practices, in view of current anti-idling and clean air legislation. Finally, there are recommendations for firms and private fleets regarding sustainable transportation best practices. (A) For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD record number 201310RT334E.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2013 CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA - TRANSPORTATION: BETTER - FASTER - SAFERSame topicVehicle emissions and performanceFrench-language works237,207