MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2398414219 · doi:10.1061/9780784479827.213

Temporary Haul Road Layout Design Optimization Based on a Rough Grading Project

2016· article· en· W2398414219 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueConstruction Research Congress 2016 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarthworksHeuristicsHaulagePage layoutInteger programmingLinear programmingComputer scienceGridField (mathematics)Industrial engineeringEngineeringMathematical optimizationOperations researchAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temporary haul roads are typically designed and constructed to handle mass earthworks in heavy civil and industrial construction, critical to achieving haulage efficiency and safety in earthmoving operations. Traditional temporary haul road layout design has long been based on experience rather than science. Previous research endeavors developed mathematical models and solution algorithms in an attempt to explore the possibility of analytically addressing temporary haul road layout design problems, while achieving limited progress. This study introduces a grid-based optimization methodology by adopting a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) model, aimed to generate the optimal layout solution in real-world applications. The optimization processes and results are illustrated with a practical engineering case. A comparison of different layout designs for the same case, including the heuristics-based field design and analytical designs resulting from recent research, shows that the proposed methodology is capable of producing optimal solutions to temporary haul road layout design problems.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.260 · 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