MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W600919586

WANTED: A New International Air Policy

2006· article· en· W600919586 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jim Facette

Bibliographic record

VenueAirports international · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen skiesTonnageLiberalizationArgument (complex analysis)Air traffic controlAviationGovernment (linguistics)Control (management)Air travelBusinessInternational tradeAir transportEconomicsEngineeringTransport engineeringMarket economyManagement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents an argument for the further economic liberalization of Canadian airport cargo policies as understood by the Canadian Airports Council. Beginning in 1992, Canada began easing its control on their airports by shifting the control to local operators. However, the article argues that the government's interventions that persist post-defederalization have inhibited Canada's air cargo market to the point where no Canadian airport, as of 2006, is in the top 40 for air cargo tonnage. In the last 15 years, local authorities have added $9 billion in infrastructure improvements to airports as well as increased in efficiency and capacity with regard to cargo. The authors use the general legal framework of Open Skies type agreements for the mutual benefit of Canadian operators and foreign investors (in addition to the benefit of Canadian jobs being created).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0130.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.003

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAirports internationalSame topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207