MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2240181138

Integration of Preventive Maintenance in the Pavement Preservation Program: Ontario Experience

2005· article· en· W2240181138 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation research circular · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPavement managementTransport engineeringPavement engineeringPreventive maintenanceEngineeringDriver rehabilitationChristian ministryWork (physics)Level of servicePlanned maintenanceRehabilitationOperations managementAsphaltReliability engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional pavement preservation (PP) practices have mainly focused on corrective maintenance activities. However, with the constant demands on highway networks and the extensive costs required for rehabilitation, highway agencies have started to adopt preventive maintenance (PM) strategies into their PP programs. PM is a set of activities performed while the pavement is still in a good or fair condition to inhibit progressive failure and therefore extend the service life of the pavement. Potentially, PM can enhance pavement performance and reduce the life-cycle costs of highway facilities. The Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO) has been one of the pioneering agencies in applying pavement management system (PMS) analysis tools to its annual pavement maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) program at the network level. Currently, MTO is in the process of implementing a PP program that includes PM as a key component. In this program, a practical PM model is developed through a set of dedicated decision trees (DT). This determines the feasible maintenance activities for each pavement section based on a number of factors, including existing pavement surface layer, condition, age, and traffic. The PM work program is finalized through budget optimization to determine the most cost-effective maintenance activity for each candidate section. The impact of the PM activities on the overall pavement performance is modeled as an immediate improvement in the pavement condition index and/or a slower rate of deterioration, depending on the nature of the PM activity. This impact is then accounted for and integrated with pavement rehabilitation analysis during the course of development of the final work program for the entire highway network. Budget analysis is performed to determine the impact of incorporating the PM activities into the PP program as compared to a PP program that includes rehabilitation activities only. Analyses results showed that under the same budget scenarios, incorporating PM into the overall PP program resulted in a significant improvement to the network condition. In this paper, an overview of the MTO PP program, with special emphasis on the integration of the PM program into the PMS, is presented. The development of PM DTs and performance modeling is discussed in detail. In addition, budget scenario analyses comparing the use of PM and M&R activities, as opposed to M&R activities only, in the development of the final work program, are presented.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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