MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Total Cost-Benefit Analysis of Alternative Corrosion Management Strategies for a Steel Roadway Bridge

2012· article· en· W2061085542 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bridge Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGirderCorrosionBridge (graph theory)EngineeringCarbon steelWeathering steelForensic engineeringCorrosion preventionCivil engineeringStructural engineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a methodology for evaluating alternative corrosion management strategies for a steel roadway bridge based on a total cost-benefit analysis. In this analysis, the impacts of girder type and preservation intervention selection on the bridge owner, users, and public are considered. The methodology is demonstrated for a steel girder bridge in Wallis, Switzerland. Painted carbon steel and unpainted weathering steel girders are investigated. The investigated preservation interventions are the following: protection by painting, protection by metalizing, and replacement. Deterioration of the girders by corrosion is modeled probabilistically. Following the methodology demonstration, sensitivity studies are performed, wherein the corrosion environment, traffic volume, and detour length during interventions are varied. The effects of these variations on the various benefit types are then discussed and the conditions under which the various corrosion management strategies may be optimal are identified.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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