MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W601266509

Guidelines for Creating Safe and Efficient Freight-Supportive Communities

2014· article· fr· W601266509 on OpenAlex

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 2014: Past, Present, Future - 2014 Conference and Exhibition of the Transportation Association of Canada // Transport 2014 : Du passé vers l'avenir - 2014 Congrès et Exposition de 'Association des transports du Canada · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransportation Systems and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditTraffic managementBusinessMetropolitan areaRedevelopmentChristian ministryBest practiceTransport engineeringEngineeringEconomicsManagement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As communities change, through growth and intensification, it will become increasingly important to consider the needs of the freight movement industry. Efficient and effective freight networks, integrated with freight-supportive developments, will help ensure that consumers and businesses have access to the goods and services they need and will help support local economies. Recognizing that goal, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation has produced this first-of-its-kind draft Freight-Supportive Guidelines. The purpose of the draft Guidelines is to help municipalities, planners, engineers, and other practitioners create safe and efficient freight-supportive communities. The draft Guidelines address planning, site design and transportation operations, and include strategies in each area to support freight movement. The draft Guidelines indicate how to conduct a freight audit to review existing supply of freight facilities and also measure the demand for these facilities. The freight audit is the first step in data collection and analysis that will help communities in their subsequent planning efforts for freight movement. The draft Guidelines also include case studies of best practices from Canada and international locations. This paper focuses on key guidelines for supporting freight within multimodal environments. It describes the freight audit process, and highlights best practices examples. This paper is in effect an executive summary of the complete draft Freight-Supportive Guidelines report, and is designed to enhance the reader’s understanding of how freight fits into a modern community as it works to achieve other objectives such as complete streets, congestion management and metropolitan mobility. As the Freight-Supportive Guidelines report has been prepared on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, its intended audience is Ontario local municipalities, regions and counties, and private developers working in Ontario. While select guidelines may be Ontario-specific, the Freight-Supportive Guidelines provide pertinent information regarding land use and transportation planning, site design and roadway operations that could help create freight-supportive communities across Canada.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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