MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915513037 · doi:10.1080/10298436.2014.960998

An overview of various new road profile quality evaluation criteria: part 2

2014· article· en· W2915513037 on OpenAlexaff
Louis Gagnon, Guy Doré, Marc J. Richard

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pavement Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuel efficiencyTruckTrailerAutomotive engineeringSuspension (topology)International Roughness IndexPoint (geometry)Computer scienceRadiator (engine cooling)Quality (philosophy)Environmental scienceTransport engineeringSurface finishEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the second part of an article which correlates road-induced impacts on vehicle to a selection of road assessment criteria. The impacts on tyre, suspension and radiator wear are studied by running a multibody semi-trailer truck model on 270 road profiles. The model accurateness is assessed by comparing international roughness index (IRI)–impact relationships to those published in the literature. A new profile rating method uses wavelength content to predict the impacts of a specific profile on driver and passenger health and safety, truck wear and fuel consumption. It is concluded that (1) medium wavelengths severely impact fuel consumption, component wear and safety; (2) simple, two-point and four-point indices yield similar results, but the more the points the better the correlation; (3) the IRI is good at predicting general trends in road-induced vehicular impact but is weak for specific impacts and (4) tyre wear correlates linearly while component wear requires quadratic correlations.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0130.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Pavement EngineeringSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207