Evaluation of alternative criteria for determining the optimal location of RWIS stations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a comprehensive framework for determining the location of road weather information system (RWIS) stations over a regional road network. In the proposed methodology, the region is divided into a grid of equal-sized zones which are considered as the minimum spatial unit for allocating a candidate set of RWIS stations. These zones are ranked according to a set of pre-specified criteria that reflect the needs for, and potential benefits from, real-time road weather information, including road surface temperature variability, precipitation, network traffic, and collision patterns. A case study based on the existing RWIS network in the province of Ontario was conducted to illustrate the major features of the proposed method and evaluate the implications of alternative location selection criteria. The findings of the study suggest that it is feasible to develop a systematic process for locating RWIS stations using an integrated location criterion to capture multiple factors being considered in practice. The study has also revealed the need to establish quantitative models for estimating the benefit of real-time information from RWIS stations, which is the foundation of a cost–benefit-based RWIS location optimization model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it