MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Case-Based Reasoning System for Modeling Infrastructure Deterioration

2002· article· en· W2143380318 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing in Civil Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsReuseComputer scienceCase-based reasoningRepresentation (politics)Component (thermodynamics)DecompositionKnowledge representation and reasoningExtensibilityAdaptation (eye)Data modelingSoftware engineeringData miningArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deterioration models are essential components of infrastructure management systems (IMSs) because they predict the future condition of infrastructure facilities and consequently assist in optimizing maintenance decisions. Case-based reasoning (CBR) is proposed to generate deterioration models that benefit from the large amount of facility data stored in IMS databases and updated on a regular basis. CBRMID (CBR for modeling infrastructure deterioration) is a new CBR system developed to satisfy the special requirements of modeling infrastructure deterioration and to provide government agencies with practical, accurate, and versatile deterioration models. CBRMID is required to support (1) hierarchial decomposition of infrastructure facilities; (2) representation of facility component interactions; (3) versatility and extensibility of case and knowledge representation; (4) data reusing and sharing; (5) representation of time-dependent data; and (6) fuzziness of retrieval knowledge. In this paper, the architecture of CBRMID is described in terms of case representation, case retrieval, case adaptation, and case accumulation. An application example generated using CBRMID is also presented.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.196 · 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