Assessment of precast stringer highway bridges using mean load method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mean load method of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code is used to evaluate the shear and bending moment reliability of existing precast "type G" stringer bridges in Alberta that date from the late 1950s. The overall stringer population is categorized into distinct subpopulations using bridge-specific factors, including the degree of deterioration and approach span condition, which are readily identified during a brief field visit or from inspection reports. Critical sections to be investigated for reliability resisting shear forces or bending moments are determined. The reliability indices decrease if the reinforcement is corroded or the bridge approach is not smooth, and the reduction of the maximum axle loads permitted by legislation due to these factors is quantified. For bridge subpopulations where the actual reliability index is less than the target value for current legal axle loads, the critical axle load for moment is less than that for shear. Therefore, if flexural distress is not noted during inspection of such structures, they are likely adequate for the actual loading they are subjected to.Key words: corrosion, deterioration, dynamic load allowance, mean load method, reliability, visual inspection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".