MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1597932877

Modeling and Analysis of Truck Weight and Credential Screening System

2008· article· en· W1597932877 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Lee, Garland Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 87th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransport Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckCredentialBridge (graph theory)Port (circuit theory)EngineeringProcess (computing)Computer scienceTransport engineeringSimulationAutomotive engineeringOperations researchComputer securityElectrical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study develops a simulation model that describes the truck weight and credential screening process and analyzes the impacts of key control parameters of such screening systems on performance quality. A discrete time-wise simulation model was developed that consists of three major components performing distinct roles in the simulation. For a case study, the Port Mann Bridge truck compliance screening system in British Columbia, Canada, was selected and modeled in the simulation. There are two focus parameters: the truck weight threshold; and, the transponder -tagged truck rate. The analysis investigated the changes in the model responses for the selected performance measures to variations of those parameters. The findings from the study analysis are also presented in this paper.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 87th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicTransport Systems and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207