MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055720265 · doi:10.1139/l03-002

Data acquisition and analysis for highway construction using geographic information systems

2003· article· en· W2055720265 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Osama Moselhi, Ahmed Hassanein

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEarthworksTerrainGeographic information systemInterface (matter)SoftwareComputer scienceData acquisitionKey (lock)Information systemData miningTransport engineeringEngineeringRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Earthmoving operations represent a sizeable percentage of highway construction costs. Accurate estimation of cut and fill quantities, as well as haul distances, are thus essential for developing realistic schedules and reliable cost estimates for highway construction projects. This paper presents a model designed to aid highway construction personnel in optimizing earthmoving operations by developing realistic mass haul diagrams. The model automates data acquisition and accounts for the presence of different soil strata and natural and (or) man-made obstructions affecting earthmoving plans. Geographic information systems (GIS) are employed to generate three-dimensional digital terrain models of the topography and soil profiles. The model is supported by a relational database for soil data and has been implemented in a prototype software developed in ArcView ® environment. It provides a user-friendly interface to facilitate data entry and efficient reporting capabilities. The model has flexible input and output formats designed to facilitate data sharing with a number of commercially available software systems. A numerical example is presented to demonstrate the features of the developed model.Key words: data acquisition, geographic information systems, quantity estimating, earthwork optimization.

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)0.000
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 score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.184
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207