MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182564873

Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations

2015· article· en· W2182564873 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ian Matthew, Al D. Lightstone

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsVale (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationGeneral partnershipTransport engineeringProcess (computing)Noise (video)EngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental planningBusinessComputer scienceGeographyPolitical scienceFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development in close proximity to railway operations has the potential to create myriad negative effects – noise and vibration for the future homeowners are top of the list in terms of potential impact to the enjoyment of one’s property.  In 2003, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the Railway Association of Canada (RAC) entered into a partnership to develop common approaches to the prevention and resolution of issues arising from new residential development in proximity to rail operations.  In 2013, the working group released their “Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations”. Based on the FCM/RAC document, this paper summarizes the potential noise and vibration proximity issues and examines the analysis and prediction techniques employed in various jurisdictions in Canada.  The legislation (Federal, Provincial, and Municipal) which exists in Canada governing the various elements of the planning and development process is reviewed.  Lastly, the various approaches to mitigation which can be employed to reduce the potential for noise and vibration impacts are explored.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207