Indicators and framework for assessing sustainable infrastructure
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
Much of the focus on sustainable infrastructure has concentrated on buildings and construction processes. To advance this thinking for other civil infrastructure systems (CIS), this paper outlines a framework that uses a set of proposed indicators to measure the sustainability of chosen infrastructure options and help select the preferred alternative in a multiobjective decision approach. Physically implementing "sustainable infrastructure" involves three life stages for any project: preproject planning, project implementation, and ongoing operations. It is critical to evaluate the sustainability of chosen options in each of these life stages. This research develops two categories of indicators, mandatory screening indicators (MSI) and judgment indicators (JI), and a multilayer approach for incorporating these indicators. A normalization procedure has been adapted to work within the framework to help compare alternatives across a range of indicators and different orders of data magnitude. A hypothetical example using a transmission line corridor is presented to illustrate how the framework can be applied.Key words: indicators, infrastructure, sustainable, environment, decision making, alternatives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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