Estimating Potential Cost Savings from Implementing an Innovative TBM Guidance Automation System
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
It is vitally important to evaluate costs, benefits and risks associated with adopting a new method or technology prior to field implementation. The present research proposes a framework for estimating potential cost savings by implementing new method or technology in the field in terms of: (1) productivity-dependent crew cost; (2) time-dependent indirect cost; and (3) time-independent indirect cost in the current practice that can be removed. In regards to system reliability, the proposed framework guides the identification of possible breakdown event categories and the evaluation of probabilities and consequences for each category of event. A case study is presented in the context of developing an innovative TBM guidance automation system in tunnel construction. Potential cost saving resulting from implementing the new automation system for a 1,000-meter-long drainage tunnel project in Edmonton, Alberta is estimated to be $346k, which far outweighs the additional cost associated with system reliability (about $ 34k) by about ten-fold.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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