ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE ON SUCCESS AND FAILURE CASE STUDIES IN CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN - THE GARDINER EXPRESSWAY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Civil engineering education at graduate and undergraduate levels commonly draws on structural engineering case studies, such as the 1907 Quebec Bridge Collapse or the 1981 Hyatt Regency Collapse to illustrate the significance of technical engineering design decisions, and their implications. A study of the Gardiner Expressway in a senior level civil engineering design course is valuable for a variety of reasons and are discussed in the paper. Construction of the Fredrick G. Gardiner Expressway, which acts as a main commuter route through Downtown Toronto, began in 1956 and was completed in 1965. Today, at over 50 years old, the expressway is experiencing traffic congestion, and visible degradation of structural materials, and consequently public safety may be compromised. This paper explores the history of the Gardiner Expressway and aspects of its design as it pertains to the current state of the aging infrastructure. There is a need for students to gain an understanding, exercise design skills and the design process in application to current, real world engineering design challenges such as aging structures and infrastructure.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".