MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W623743356

CPR'S LONG-TERM STRATEGY PAYS OFF

2001· article· en· W623743356 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M D Roney, D K Meyler

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational railway journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlangeBogieEngineeringAutomotive engineeringAxleMonorailStructural engineeringForensic engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term strategies to improve rail and wheel wear control on Canadian Pacific Railway's 1100km coal route in British Columbia have reduced rail and wheel costs, and helped to increase axleloads (reducing wagon-km costs by 25%) and reduce fuel consumption by 15%. These strategies included: a switch to Japanese 350-390BHN chrome-alloyed hardened steel rail; overcoming a gauge problem by substituting hardwood sleepers with larger baseplates eccentric to the field to resist overturning; by preferential grinding of the field side of the low rail; producing an artificially worn wheel profile with the addition of 1.6mm of metal in the flange foot to improve steering and reduce creepage and wear; the use of frame brace steerable bogies; and frequent reprofiling of rail to ensure good contact stresses. Inspection procedures for the rails to extend rail wear limits are also described. A programme was undertaken to replace cut spikes as a means of fastening rails to sleepers in curves less than 250m radius with a rolled plate held down by five screw spikes with spring washers and Pandrol e-clips. 370BHN low alloy hypereutechtoid rail steels have been installed recently on curves and trials of new rails with an additional 5.6mm vertical wear have been undertaken. Improvements to rail lubrication are also described.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0890.039

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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational railway journalSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207