Holistic Analysis of Infrastructure Deterioration and Rehabilitation Using System Dynamics
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
Rehabilitation programs are essential for efficiently managing large networks of infrastructure assets and sustaining their safety and operability. While numerous studies in the literature have focused on various aspects of infrastructure rehabilitation, limited efforts have investigated the overall dynamics of the process. The research presented in this paper, therefore, takes a holistic view to investigate the dynamics that affect rehabilitation decisions and the long-term performance of an infrastructure network. First, the interactions among the main parameters related to asset deterioration, rehabilitation actions, and cost accumulation have been analyzed using causal loop diagrams (CLDs). Afterward, a system dynamics (SD) model has been developed based on the CLDs and the underlying mathematical relations among the various parameters. The SD model was then tested on a network of 1,000 assets over a 50-year plan, considering a range of rehabilitation policies regarding budgets, possible rehabilitation actions, and fund allocation options. The model proved to be a practical and effective tool for quick assessment of the long-term impact of rehabilitation policies on infrastructure performance and costs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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