MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2189559459

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PERMEABLE DESIGN PRO PERMEABLE INTERLOCKING CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN SYSTEM

2009· article· en· W2189559459 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rfp David

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterlockingSubbaseSubgradeCivil engineeringPervious concreteLow-impact developmentStormwaterEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceConstruction engineeringTransport engineeringStormwater management
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Note: The following is the notation used in this paper: ( . ) for decimals and ( ) for thousands. Summary National, state/provincial and municipal legislation regulating stormwater runoff in the United States and Canada have provided increased incentives for using permeable pavements. In addition, regulatory frameworks for implementation of sustainable design have embraced permeable pavement solutions. These regulations are often called low impact development (LID) or sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS). A logical and technically sound design process using design software can support design professionals and help permeable pavement achieve full potential in North America. In 2008, the Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute (ICPI) introduced a non-proprietary software program called Permeable Design Pro that integrates hydrological and structural design solutions for permeable interlocking concrete pavement. The hydrological analysis determines if the volume of water from user-selected rainfall events can be stored and released by the pavement structure. User defined parameters determine how much water infiltrates into the soil subgrade, enters pipe subdrains or flows from the pavement surface. The structural capacity of PICP is determined using the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials [AASHTO, 1993] structural design equations for base/subbase thickness to support vehicular traffic. This paper describes the development of the structural and hydrological design methodology with an example of its use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.008

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207