MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W607278582

Two Birds with One Stone

2005· article· en· W607278582 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Croft

Bibliographic record

VenueAirport Magazine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRunwaySnow removalClearingASDE-XTransport engineeringIntersection (aeronautics)Investment (military)AeronauticsEngineeringSnowComputer scienceOperations managementBusinessFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article reviews two new multi purpose snow removal machines that have changed both the dynamic and size of snow removal teams at many busy airports. Toronto's Pearson International Airport, by using one of the new multi purpose equipment, has set the bar for minimum runway down time for snow clearing - 10 to 15 minutes for a runway, a parallel taxiway and two high speed turnoffs, plus chemicals, sand application and inspection. One of the keys to Toronto's speed-cleaning is equipment that is custom fit for the job at hand, rather than compromise equipment. At BWI airport, crews are experimenting in-situ with the available new equipment. Complimenting the issue for BWI is that its runways intersect, which means that both runways must be shut down temporarily to clean the intersection, and crews take about 30 minutes to clear the 150 foot wide runway. The airport is investigating how the multi purpose machines will help accelerate the clearing. Despite the heavy up-front investment for the new machines, expectations are that the equipment costs can be recouped in savings to the airlines in one year or less.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1350.047

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
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 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAirport MagazineSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207