Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complex problem of metrication of highway design, construction and maintenance has been the subject of a number of studies and pilot projects carried out by the Federal Highway Administration (F.H.W.A.) of the United States and the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada. Through a research grant, the FHWA of the U.S.A. assigned the Ohio Department of Transportation, the Illinois Department of Transportation and the Oregon Highway Division to design, construct, and maintain these metric projects. The author has reviewed the experience and conclusions of these studies and the problems encountered in the pilot projects relative to the design, survey, contracting, construction, signing, and public reactions to the metrication process. In the conclusions to this review, the author questions some of the recommendations of these studies, specifically in the area of curvature and station definition, notation convention, and the concept of dual signing. In these and other areas recommended guidelines for highway metrication are proposed. Finally, the author presents a set of equations and computer generated tables for highway design and layout in metric incorporating the flexibility of 10, 20, 40, and 100 metre station and curvature definition.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".