Snake Eyes or Sevens?: Oil is Below $50 a Barrel But a Global Recession Spells Trouble for 2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article looks at the financial prospects for the world airline industry. Short-term, profits are threatened by instability in fuel prices, which are falling after rising rapidly in 2008, creating opportunities for some and causing losses for others who hedged against their rising. The U.S. and Canadian segment of the industry is expected to be profitable in 2009, but the world’s airlines are projected to lose $2.5 billion, according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA). IATA’s chief economist predicts the most challenging two years ever, with very large drops in passenger and cargo volumes. The situation is comparable to the drop experienced in 2001, but slightly worse. Global revenue declines have only occurred twice since 1947: in 200-2001 and 2001-2002. The six-year expansion that began in 2003 saw them rise 66 percent. At the same time, the collapse in fuel prices has offset revenue drops, so that one analyst predicts U.S. airlines will post their best ever collective profit of $9.2 billion in 2009. Another projects losses of $4 billion for 2008 in the U.S. and profits of $2 billion for 2009. European airline industry predictions are more pessimistic. Capacity continued to grow in 2008 because fuel hedges and the strong euro protected airlines from rising fuel costs to some extent. Capacity rose 4.1 percent, nearly double the rate of traffic. Developments in Asia and Latin America also spell problems for the near future, but with fuel prices expected to remain low, many airlines should be expected to weather the downturn.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".