Orthographic Deck Wear Surface System Selection - Lions Gate Bridge North Approach Viaduct, Vancouver BC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents the wear surface replacement options analysis methodology that was used to select the resurfacing system for the Lions Gate Bridge North Approach Viaduct in Vancouver British Columbia. The objective was to select the surfacing system that presents the best combination of performance and value. Lions Gate was opened to traffic in 1938. The bridge carries three traffic lanes, the centre lane is a counterflow (reversible) lane whereby two lanes are open to traffic in one direction at any given time, and a single lane is open in the opposite direction. The original bridge deck of the North Viaduct was replaced in 1975 with an orthotropic steel deck. The orthotropic deck was first surfaced with epoxy asphalt concrete and has since been resurfaced several times with bituminous asphalt concrete, most recently in 2001. A list was prepared of potential surfacing systems that have been used on orthotropic decks. The surfacing systems evaluated included: Bolidt ZOK; Epoxy Asphalt Concrete; Gussasphalt; Polyester Concrete; Polymer Modified Asphalt Concrete; Rosphalt 50; and Trinidad Lake Asphalt. An estimated construction cost and life cycle cost was prepared for each alternative wear surface system. Each system was then evaluated based on a number of weighted criteria. The paper presents the ranking for each material, and then presents the outcome in terms of the highest ranking wear surface systems. (A) For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD record number 201310RT334E.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".