MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2198798209

Développement durable dans les chaussées québécoises et françaises en 2010

2011· preprint· fr· W2198798209 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michèle St-Jacques, Yves Brosseaud

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2011
Typepreprint
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Une chaussée durable est 'une chaussée sûre, efficace et respectueuse de l'environnement, répondant aux exigences des usagers au présent sans compromettre celles des générations futures'. L'environnement est au centre des discussions nationales et internationales. La notion de développement durable figure dans tous les discours. En 2009, des 40 Mt d'enrobés produits en France, 1,7 Mt contenait des matériaux recyclés, soit 4% des enrobés. Au Québec, sur les routes du MTQ, 25% du tonnage d'enrobés, produits en 2009, contenaient du matériau recyclé, soit 1 Mt sur les 4 Mt d'enrobés produits. en 2009. Le MTQ a également produit 60 000 tonnes d'enrobés tièdes en 2009. Mais qu'en est-il en milieu urbain ? Comment se traduisent réellement les notions de développement durable dans la gestion au quotidien des chaussées urbaines, tant dans les travaux neufs, que dans celui de l'entretien, au coeur de la préoccupation des gestionnaires ? C'est la réponse que tentera d'apporter cet article, au travers des huit procédés et techniques, à même de satisfaire ces notions, qui ont été retenues.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207