Evaluation of New Sacrificial Anode Cathodic Protection Systems For Highway Bridge Decks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper summarizes the work undertaken by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) on the evaluation of sacrificial anode cathodic protection systems for bridge deck applications. Results of a demonstration project on the North Otter Creek Bridge on Highway 9 in Ontario are presented. Test results for three proprietary sacrificial anode systems installed on the structure in September 2003 are included. The sacrificial anodes examined include a zinc mesh anode with an activated backfill (Galvashield mesh anode), a zinc chain anode with a conductive polymer backfill (Galvostrip anode) and an anode consisting of two zinc rods precast in an activated backfill in the form of a strip anode (Galvashield strip anode). Initial performance of the systems indicate that the 100 MV criterion generally accepted as an indication of effective cathodic protection, is being met. Monitoring of the systems will continue in order to assess the long term performance and seasonal variations. At the end of this monitoring period, expected to be four years, an evaluation will be made as to future ministry use of the systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".