MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2249487113

Clarus Multistate Regional Demonstrations: Summary of Evaluation Results and Lessons Learned

2012· article· en· W2249487113 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deepak Gopalakrishna, Chris Cluett, Kevin Balke, Paul Pisano

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research E-Circular · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOperations researchDecision support systemTransport engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clarus is a national data management system that integrates road weather data from multiple agencies and shares quality-checked surface transportation weather and pavement observations. Operated as an experimental system for demonstration and evaluation purposes, Clarus has grown substantially since its inception in 2004. As of August 2011, Clarus ingests data from over 2,250 environmental sensor stations in 38 states, four Canadian provinces, and five local department of transportation (DOT) organizations. To spur the growth of applications using Clarus data, the FHWA funded a phased multistate research effort to create and demonstrate operational decision tools in a real-world setting. In addition to an overall application demonstrating the enhanced weather forecasting capabilities possible using Clarus data, four new applications, termed use cases, were developed as part of this effort. These included tools for seasonal load restrictions decision support, nonwinter maintenance and operations decision support, multistate control strategy coordination, and enhanced road weather content for traveler advisories. Proof-of-concept prototype applications were developed by two different systems integrators and deployed by the participating state DOTs during 2010–2011. These deployments were independently evaluated for their potential to improve system operations. This paper summarizes the results of the independent evaluations, providing a glimpse into the value of these applications to state DOTs. Results show that the Clarus system enables innovative applications that provide a wide array of decision support system possibilities. While each of the applications has additional research requirements and implementation challenges to overcome, they demonstrate the potential to proactively change maintenance and weather-responsive management.

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 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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research E-CircularSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207