MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749349924 · doi:10.1139/facets-2016-0043

Evaluation of fiber optic installation methods, a case study on micro-trenching in Alberta, Canada

2017· article· en· W2749349924 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Hediyeh Vaseli, Leila Hashemian, Alireza Bayat, Leon F. Gay, Ian H. Williams, Jordan Melzer

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Line Communications and Noise
Canadian institutionsTelus (Canada)University of Alberta
FundersMitacs
KeywordsOptical time-domain reflectometerTrenchGround-penetrating radarOptical fiber cableDurabilityAttenuationOptical fiberEnvironmental scienceEngineeringFiber optic sensorRadarTelecommunicationsComputer scienceMaterials scienceFiber optic splitter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Micro-trenching is an innovative and discreet utility installation method that includes the creation of a narrow trench to lay cable or conduit in the ground. To investigate the functionality and durability of micro-trenching in cold regions, two micro-trenching technologies were employed and monitored over the course of two winters in a parking lot in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. During construction, productivity rate and generated waste material were studied. The installation’s physical integrity and optical performance were also evaluated during the monitoring period. Physical integrity was assessed by monitoring the conduit location using ground-penetrating radar (GPR), and an optical time-domain reflectometer (OTDR) test was conducted to determine attenuation in performance. Results indicated that the installation experienced undesirable upward and downward movements in sections with high traffic load, which may be prevented with a more effective reinstatement method. However, the fiber’s optical performance was not affected.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicPower Line Communications and NoiseFrench-language works237,207