MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W604888632

WORLD'S BEST WORST TO FIRST IN 10 YEARS : HOW'D THAT HAPPEN? THE SECRET TO CN'S SUCCESS

2002· article· en· W604888632 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueTrains · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueCorporationProfitability indexBusinessFinanceService (business)Metropolitan areaPrime ministerManagementEconomicsMarketingPolitical scienceLawHistoryPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article relates the story of the 10-year turnaround by Canadian National railroad, which had deteriorated into terrible financial shape because it was a crown corporation dedicated to public service about profitability. Having been formed out of several insolvent railroads, it had so much duplicate track that two-thirds of the track together accounted for only 10% of revenues. Under the previous head, progress had been made by cutting work force, shedding ancillary businesses and trimming unprofitable services when the then-Canadian Prime Minister named an outsider, Paul Tellier, to succeed the retiring head in 1992. By 1995, finances were strong enough for the railroad to go private in an offering of 83.8 million shares, which netted $2.2 billion. Tellier gave rail professionals training in business techniques and tightened the connections between operating and financial performance. In 1998, it bought the Illinois Central as the beginning of a southward expansion. Next was a marketing alliance with Kansas City Southern. As CN has continued to grow, it has picked up critics among unions and some customers who complain that staff cuts have hampered service. But overall, CN is experiencing success.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.007
Scholarly communication0.0150.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.171 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrainsSame topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207