MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587477330

Life Cycle Environmental Assessment Using Athena LCA Tool: A Manitoba Case Study

2016· article· en· W2587477330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ma Ahammed, Sunshine R. Sullivan, Grant Finlayson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife-cycle assessmentTruckSustainabilityEnvironmental impact assessmentEngineeringTransport engineeringLife cycle inventoryCivil engineeringProduction (economics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental sustainability is one of the four strategic priorities of the Department of Manitoba Infrastructure. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is acknowledged as one of the most comprehensive ways to evaluate the environmental impacts of different strategies associated with a physical feature. The Athena Pavement LCA software for highways is a tool that can be used to assess the environmental impacts of materials production, construction, and maintenance & rehabilitation activities over a given life cycle period. The software is also capable of modeling pavement vehicle interactions (PVI) to assess the environmental impact of traffic use phases of a roadway due to pavement surface roughness and deflection. This paper presents comparisons of the environmental impacts of various alternative strategies for a concrete pavement to demonstrate the opportunity to optimize pavement performance and environmental impacts. The concrete pavement constructed in 2015 on Manitoba Provincial Truck Highway 75 (PTH 75) has been used as a case study. A matrix of alternative concrete mix, pavement design, and maintenance and rehabilitation strategies has been used to compare environmental impacts of those alternative options. The analysis presented is expected to assist Manitoba Infrastructure and other agencies to better understand and weigh the environmental implications of alternative roadway materials, design as well as construction, maintenance and rehabilitation practices and select the best strategy considering pavement performance and preservation of our natural environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207