Development of the Detectable Warning Surface Tiles Standard Specification for the City of Winnipeg
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The City of Winnipeg has developed a Standard Construction Specification for the application, material specification, design and installation of Detectable Warning Surface Tiles (DWST). The utilization of these tiles has proven to be an invaluable mechanism for supporting the City of Winnipeg’s Universal Design Policy and making our streets safer for pedestrians of all ages and abilities. Developed over the course of 10 years, the City has established a proven standard for the design, use and installation of DWST. During the development process the City has monitored the performance, installations procedures, durability and functionality of the DWST and has engaged the general public and stakeholders such as Canadian National Institute for the Blind, Vision Impaired Resource Network and the Mayor’s Access Advisory Committee throughout the process with much success. Public Works also researched other jurisdictions that experience severe weather patterns similar to Winnipeg, particularly those with winter months. Through this paper, the City of Winnipeg presents the current Standard Specification and describes all of the rationalization and lessons learned behind the development of the Standard. This will aid other jurisdictions is implementing their own Standards and expedite their development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".