MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W620961572

THE NEW ALPHABET ROUTES : RAILROADS COMPETE AND COOPERATE FOR TRAFFIC IN NEW ENGLAND

2002· article· en· W620961572 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacob Greenstein

Bibliographic record

VenueTrains · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransport engineeringCompetition (biology)IncentiveMileTrack (disk drive)Routing (electronic design automation)BusinessPort (circuit theory)Line (geometry)Last mile (transportation)GeographyTelecommunicationsEngineeringEconomicsMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complexities of routing freight through the crowded Northeast corridor to serve the densely populated six states that make up New England are being tackled by rail lines' decision to cooperate and piece together routes over a network that is divided among a few big players and some 30 short lines. Because the more logical route, the one along the coast, is crowded with passenger and commuter traffic that forces freights off to sidings to accommodate business and pleasure travelers, the freight operators shift to different routes. CSX has a 197-mile line from Albany, NY, to Boston. Worcester, 44 miles west of Boston, is a major intermodal hub for containers, mainly from Asia. Norfolk Southern has no track of its own and so partners with local carriers. To the north, CN and CP are competing for Canadian business. Competition and incentive routing create ever- changing alliances and route structures to more freight swiftly into and out of the region.

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 score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrainsSame topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207