MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W656187676

7 Lanes...7 Stories: How Class Is are Prepping Key North American Intermodal Corridors For Even More Growth

2006· article· en· W656187676 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeff Stagl

Bibliographic record

VenueProgressive railroading · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilestoneQuarter (Canadian coin)Port (circuit theory)MilePaceGeographyTransport engineeringEconomyEngineeringArchaeologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With second quarter intermodal volume for 2006 surpassing the typically dominant fourth quarter for 2005, a new milestone has been reached for the decade since such numbers began to be collected by the Intermodal Association of North America. The rise is due to skyrocketing international volume from Asian shippers. With the rise in demand, steps are being taken to ensure capacity keeps pace to avoid bottlenecks such as the ones that occurred in 1994, the last period when growth was so rapid. This article describes efforts of Class I's to prepare for more growth. The railroads covered are BNSF, Canadian National Railway (CN), Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR), CSXI (CSX Intermodal) Kansas City Southern (KCS) Norfolk Southern (NS) and Union Pacific (UP). The article includes maps of key routes, such as the 670-mile Heartland Corridor, which, when completed at the end of 2009, will cut 233 miles from intermodal moves between Norfolk's port and Chicago. The Norfolk-to-Columbus, Ohio, route will save about 300 miles. Additional highlights include the Iron Triangle between Albany, N.Y. and Chicago, Albany and South Florida, and Chicago and South Florida. Each line's plans are detailed.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

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 studies0.0090.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0830.017

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 venueProgressive railroadingSame topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207