MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997630532 · doi:10.1139/l09-014

Actions microclimatique et environnementale des ouvrages d’art routiers

2009· article· fr· W1997630532 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Conciatori, Eugen Brühwiler, André‐Gilles Dumont

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicBuilding materials and conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesExposition (narrative)Art

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les différentes zones d’un ouvrage d’art routier sont étudiées en fonction de leur degré d’exposition au microclimat environnant. Les conditions climatiques provenant de stations météorologiques et la cinétique des véhicules permettent de définir des zones d’exposition aux produits salants et au climat. Une division judicieuse d’un ouvrage en éléments structuraux en fonction de son exposition permet de prendre en considération l’importante variabilité spatiale et de définir des zones de sensibilité équivalente face aux détériorations. Sur la base de stations météorologiques suisses, d’un monitoring d’un ouvrage d’art routier, d’enquêtes auprès des autorités publiques, de mesures ponctuelles in situ et de recherches bibliographiques, cet article met en exergue le microclimat des structures de manière précise. Cette approche permet de définir les différentes zones d’exposition des ouvrages, à savoir les zones de brouillard salin, d’éclaboussures et de stagnation d’eau et de définir l’importance du microclimat en vue de prédire l’évolution des détériorations des 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 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)0.001
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicBuilding materials and conservationFrench-language works237,207