MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1569249850

DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS TO ACCOMMODATE LONG COMBINATION VEHICLES AND LOG HAUL TRUCKS ON RURAL HIGHWAYS IN ALBERTA, CANADA

2000· article· en· W1569249850 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J Morrall

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckTransport engineeringTrailerEngineeringAutomotive engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to outline the geometric design features that have been developed to accommodate Long Combination Vehicles (LCVs) and log haul trucks on rural highways in Alberta, Canada. Vehicles longer than 25 m are referred to as LCVs and include the following vehicles: Triple Trailer combinations, 35 m in length; Rocky Mountain Doubles, 31 m in length; log haul trucks which can be up to 30.5 m in length, with a 9 m overhang and Tumpike Doubles, 38 m in length. The paper presents the vehicle dimensions, swept path, and off­ tracking characteristics of each vehicle type. Geometric design features include intersections, ramps and centre­ line spacing on two-lane highways. The paper also presents the criteria used to develop the LCV and log haul truck route networks for the province. The movement of over-dimensional equipment, machinery and pre­ assembled components is accommodated on the high-wide-load (HWL) corridor. This 2100 km HWL corridor allows loads up to 9 m high and weights from 122 tonnes in the summer and 177 tonnes in the winter. Weights as high as 380 tonnes may be conveyed on condition that the size and space requirements of undercarriage wheel assemblies are met for critical bridge structures.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Biomass Utilization and ManagementFrench-language works237,207