MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1971941233 · doi:10.3141/1755-10

Prediction of Winter Roughness Based on Analysis of Subgrade Soil Variability

2001· article· en· W1971941233 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Guy Doré, Martin Flamand, Susan Tighe

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSubgradeFrost (temperature)Context (archaeology)Frost weatheringGeotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceFrost heavingBearing capacityCold climateSurface finishGeologyEngineeringSoil scienceSoil waterClimatologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frost action is a major cause of pavement deterioration in cold climates. Thermal cracking, differential heaving, and loss of bearing capacity during spring thaw have often been mentioned as the main mechanisms involved. Frost heave observed on pavements built over frost-susceptible subgrades can reach 200 mm in the Canadian climatic context. The problem is mainly because frost heave is rarely uniform. As a result, pavements tend to become rough during winter. Research recently conducted at Laval University in Quebec City, Quebec, Canada, has shown that winter roughness is related to the variability of subgrade-soil properties. A relationship between the variability of soil frost susceptibility and the ratio of winter and summer roughness has been developed. A new approach, based on the relationship, is proposed to help pavement designers to predict and mitigate winter roughness problems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board→Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→