MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047657032 · doi:10.1139/l00-101

Special purpose simulation templates for tunnel construction operations

2001· article· en· W2047657032 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTunneling and Rock Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruction managementProcess (computing)Construction engineeringEngineeringPlan (archaeology)Integrated project deliveryProject managementConstruction industrySystems engineeringTransport engineeringOperations researchComputer scienceCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulation is a powerful tool for decision making. It provides an appealing approach to analyze and improve repetitive processes such as tunnelling. Notwithstanding this appeal, application of simulation to real-life construction projects has been minimal. This paper describes the design, development, and application of a special purpose simulation tool for actual tunnel construction operations performed by the City of Edmonton Public Works Department. The implementation of this tool in industry was successful and serves as a model for others to follow. The decision-making process adopted by the model developers and the construction industry personnel during the design, development, and implementation of the simulation are described. The cost-planning tool in the tunnel template is very useful in making decisions and evaluating the feasibility of tunnel construction projects. The real-life application of various alternatives compared to the conceptual estimates prepared for a proposed tunnel project to be constructed in Edmonton is presented in three stages. The basic costs, operational costs, support costs, productivity, duration, and resources utilization data are presented for different alternatives for the proposed tunnel project. Future modifications required by the engineering staff of the City of Edmonton, and the proposed research for modelling uncertainties in tunnel construction are identified. The successful application of the simulation for actual construction project highlights the interactive collaborative research work between academia and industry.Key words: simulation, tunnelling, construction, modelling, planning.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.185 · 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