MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W627470480

MONORAIL IS NOT SURE BET YET FOR VEGAS OR DESIGN-BUILDERS

2004· article· en· W627470480 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueENR · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation Safety and Impact Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonorailLas vegasDamagesPlan (archaeology)Transport engineeringEngineeringBusinessOperations managementCivil engineeringPolitical scienceGeographyLawArchaeologyMetropolitan area
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las Vegass high-speed monorail system, originally scheduled to open in January 2004, will now debut in summer 2004 if all goes according to plan. The opening was delayed after a driveshaft fell off a train in a test run. The monorail, which will carry 8,000 passengers hourly between the citys convention center and eight resorts, must operate at 98% of its intended capacity for one month before it can be opened to the public. The delays may prove problematic for Bombardier. Although it purchased insurance against a late opening, the Canadian supplier may still have to pay stiff fines. Liquidated damages were at $9.26 million at last count and rising by $85,000 each day, and Bombardier is expected to have to pay a large portion of those penalties.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.215 · 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