Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT- Historically, forest roads on the BC coast have sometimes been constructed using stumps and log cribs to retain the road fill on steep slopes. However, experience has shown that road fill failures may occur after several years often due to root strength deterioration. Currently, B.C.’s forest Practices Code permits the use of logs and stumps to retain the road fill if the technique is prescribed as a “measure to maintain slope stability ” and the road will be permanently deactivated within five years of construction. Such measures must be prepared by a “qualified registered professional” (QRP). A strict interpretation of the code may lead QRPs to prepare a geotechnical design for the road fill retention structure. At present more information is needed to develop design criteria for log and stump retaining structures, specifically load carrying capacity and failure characteristics of old-growth stumps present on coastal BC terrain. Therefore, the Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada (FERIC) in cooperation with Weyerhaeuser Company’s Ltd.’s B.C. Coastal Group and EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd., conducted tests in September 2000 in order to determine the strength of typical old-growth Douglas-fir stumps. This paper presents the results of the stump pulling trials.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".