MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901375747 · doi:10.1080/10298436.2018.1545093

Approaches for local calibration of mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide joint faulting model: a case study of Ontario

2018· article· en· W2901375747 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pavement Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaGovernment of Alberta Ministry of Transportation
KeywordsCalibrationSolverJoint (building)SoftwareComputer scienceEngineeringCivil engineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) has been employed by agencies as an innovative method for pavement design since the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 1-37A was implemented in 2004. Over the years, the MEPDG has evolved into the AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software (AASHTOWare®). Local calibration of the performance models in the AASHTOWare® is a crucial and challenging task to improve the effectiveness of its application. The accuracy of the calibration depends on efficient methods and validation processes. This paper aims at developing local calibration methods for joint faulting prediction model of Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement (JPCP). This study not only focuses on improving the prediction accuracy of the joint faulting model but also demonstrating the various optimisation procedures in detail. A total of 27 representative JPCP sections were used in the processes of calibration. Three optimisation approaches were used: (1) One-At-a-Time (OAT) through the trial-and-error procedure, (2) generalised reduced gradient (GRG) using MS Excel® Solver, and (3) Levenberg-Marquardt Algorithm (LMA) fitting the functions. The prediction accuracy of local models was improved as compared with the global ones. Average Bias (AB) reduced from 0.3083 to 0.0578, and Standard Error of the Estimate (SEE) reduced from 0.3345 to 0.1912. Among the three local calibration approaches, approach 2 and approach 3 had more significant improvement on results than approach 1. Finally, the integral procedures were provided for local calibration in Ontario.

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)0.000
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 score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.215 · 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