MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W643541987

Automated Access: The Recently Completed Automated People Mover at Toronto Pearson International Airport

2006· article· en· W643541987 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
W Douglas Willoughby, Gerald K Winters

Bibliographic record

VenueCivil engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntownTrainInternational airportTransport engineeringTelecommunicationsEngineeringAeronauticsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the author discusses the Greater Toronto Airports Authority's (GTAA) construction of an automated people mover (APM) at Toronto Pearson International Airport, Canada's busiest airport, which served 29.9 million passengers in 2005. This project is part of the GTAA's larger Terminal Development Project which is designed to completely renovate two of the airport's three terminals. The article describes the design and construction of three APM stations and the dual elevated guideways which follow an alignment that is adjacent to the roadways leading to the arrivals and departures level serving Terminals 1 and 3. Two independent cable systems operate the APM system in dual shuttle mode. The trains consist of six vehicles, each of which can accommodate 25 passengers. The $136 million project began operation in July 2006. Potential future expansion plans would allow for increasing the system to a total length of 1800m, the addition of a fourth station, and a connection to the Air Rail Link enabling airport access from Toronto's downtown Union Station.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCivil engineeringSame topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207