MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016398431 · doi:10.2749/222137908796292579

Design of the Canada Line Extradosed Transit Bridge

2008· article· en· W2016398431 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Don Bergman, Andrew Griezic, Chris Scollard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecast concreteBridge (graph theory)Span (engineering)DowntownEngineeringStructural engineeringBeam bridgeLine (geometry)GirderTowerLight rail transitGeographyTransport engineeringPublic transportArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2005, TransLink procured the new Canada Line rapid transit system that will connect Richmond, the Vancouver International Airport and downtown Vancouver. The Line is scheduled for completion in 2009. An extradosed precast segmental box girder bridge was designed for the longest span on the Line, which crosses the Fraser River North Arm. The North Arm Bridge which carries two rail tracks and a suspended walkway/bikeway, is 562 m long with a 180 m main span, 139 m side spans and 52 m transition spans. A single plane of extradosed cables anchored to two 22 m tall pylons supports the main and side spans. New to North America, this bridge form provided an appropriate solution considering the design constraints. In this paper, the extradosed bridge form is introduced prior to describing the design constraints that led to its use for the North Arm Bridge. The analysis of dynamic train-structure interaction, cable anchorage details and the precast segmental composite steel/concrete pylons are also described.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207