MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Validation Study of Road Surface Water Film Depth Prediction Model

2014· article· en· W2029339477 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Luo, Jian Bei Liu, Teng Feng Guo, Cheng Yu Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced materials research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegression analysisPredictive modellingCalibrationIntensity (physics)Model validationDrainageWater flowMathematical modelEnvironmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringStatisticsSoil scienceComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surface water film thickness is one of the main factors, which affect the vehicle safety on slippery roads. Water film depth is influenced by rainfall intensity, grades, cross slopes, drainage length and pavement texture. This paper reviews the research status and makes some comparative analysis of several pavement water film depth prediction models. An experimental validation has verified and calibrated the existing water film depth prediction models results. The experimental validation of the variable in the slope water flow model has been implemented by means of a small scale physical road model in a rainfall simulator, which is constructed in a laboratory. The results of comparative analysis have shown that in the existing water film depth prediction models, the regression models predict values are more closely than mathematical-physical models. Because under different experimental conditions, the regression model calibration parameters are different. In the case of specific road characteristics for prediction of water film thickness, the model parameters can be calibrated to further improve predicting accuracy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced materials researchSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207