An Innovative Process for Winter Construction of Concrete Sidewalks - The City of Calgary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2012, after negotiations with multiple stakeholders, the revised City of Calgary (The City) Standard Specifications for Roads Construction were implemented. The summer construction season in Calgary is short and winter conditions can occur as early as September. The specifications for Concrete Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter define cold weather air temperature and the curing requirements for the off-season concrete in accordance with CSA A23.1. The Urban Development Institute of Calgary proposed lower temperature limits for winter construction combined with limited concrete protection to extend the construction season for concrete works. However, The City is reluctant to relax the winter concreting and curing regime as the value of the backlog of concrete sidewalk repairs and replacement is high, and increasing, with many failures attributed to offseason concrete construction practices. The City commissioned Tetra Tech EBA Inc. (EBA) to undertake a comprehensive review of sidewalk construction specifications and the requirements for winter curing by other municipalities across Canada, and, to develop a cold weather placing and testing protocol. The guidelines for concrete placement, the testing protocol for laboratory and field testing, and the acceptance criteria were developed. In October and November of 2013, a comprehensive research program was conducted and the results were compiled in consideration for relaxing the existing specifications for concrete sidewalk construction. This paper describes in detail the process and the data analysis. The technical aspects and the impact of the potential changes to the winter curing construction practices on the sustainable quality concrete surface works are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".