MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990700405

1997 Economic Census: Transportation: 1997 Commodity Flow Survey: Minneapolis-St Paul, MN-WI MSA (MN part)

2000· other· en· W6990700405 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRosa P: A digital library for transportation research (United States Department of Transportation) · 2000
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaCommodityCensusPopulationGeneral partnershipSurvey data collectionPrincipal (computer security)State (computer science)Quarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1997 Commodity Flow Survey (CFS) is undertaken through a partnership between the Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of Transportation. This survey produces data on the movement of goods in the United States. It provides information on commodities shipped, their value, weight, and mode of transportation, as well as the origin and destination of shipments of manufacturing, mining, wholesale, and selected retail establishments. The data from the CFS are used by public policy analysts and for transportation planning and decision-making to assess the demand for transportation facilities and services, energy use, and safety risk and environmental concerns. This report series presents data on Metropolitan Area (MA) and Remainder of State (ROS) shipment characteristics. An MSA consists of one or more counties that contain a city of 50,000 or more inhabitants, or contain a Census Bureau defined urbanized area (UA) and have a total population of at least 100,000 (75,000 in New England). Counties containing the principal concentration of population, the largest city, and surrounding densely settled area are components of the MSA. This report covers the Minneapolis-St Paul, MN-WI MSA.\n

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRosa P: A digital library for transportation research (United States Department of Transportation)French-language works237,207