MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075942634 · doi:10.1061/40646(2003)26

Lester B. Pearson International Airport Design and Construction of the Central Deicing Facility

2002· article· en· W2075942634 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chris J. Stewart

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational airportIcingEngineeringAeronauticsTransport engineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Central Deicing Facility (CDF) at Lester B. Pearson International Airport (LBPIA) was an initiative first developed in 1996 under the direction of Transport Canada. Maintaining flight surfaces clean of ice and snow, simplifying communications between controllers, pilots and deicing crews; and minimizing water pollution, were all factors governing the design of this project. An airline accident at Dryden, Ontario on March 10, 1989 and a collision between a deicing vehicle and a Boeing 747-400 on January 21, 1995 at Dorval, Quebec were both examined closely to mitigate the potential of similar incidents happening. Centralization of the de-icing process was determined to be an essential first step in meeting these goals. The facility was located to minimize aircraft holdover time (eliminating the need for `re-sprays') whilst maximizing containment of effluent and increasing throughput to meet or exceed future launch capacity. The project was also initiated to replace existing de-icing positions at the perimeter of the Terminal 1 and 2 Aprons. The construction of the CDF project was ultimately constructed under the direction of the Greater Toronto Airports Authority between April 1998 and October 1999.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207