MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W614460243

On Track with Major On-track Objectives

2012· article· en· W614460243 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeff Stagl

Bibliographic record

VenueProgressive railroading · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrack (disk drive)UpgradePlan (archaeology)Quarter (Canadian coin)FinanceTransport engineeringProductivityCapital (architecture)Work (physics)Fast trackCapital expenditureWarrantBusinessOperations managementEngineeringEconomicsComputer scienceEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freight railroads operating in the United States plan to spend a record $13 billion this year to expand, upgrade or repair their infrastructure. The figure could even approach $14 billion if several Class 1’s post strong enough financial performance in the first quarter of this year to warrant a capital spending increase, or if Congress extends the short-line tax credit through calendar year 2012. Class 1’s and other freight roads in Canada have also boosted their 2012 capex budgets. The article shows how many railroads plan to take on an ambitious number of projects this year because there is a significant amount of capital allocated for maintenance-of-way (MOW). The challenge is to determine ways to complete MOW with the increase in traffic. Track time is even tighter this year because U.S./Canadian carloads have increased and intermodal loads have increased as well. The article describes some of the many projects the major railroads are undertaking in the future and how they plan to get more productivity and efficiently out of available resources to complete the work quickly and safely.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2000.082

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgressive railroadingSame topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207