MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924928156 · doi:10.2749/vancouver.2017.2512

Condition Assessment and Renewal Options Analysis for the Queensborough Bridge

2017· article· en· W2924928156 on OpenAlexaff
Casey Leggett, Tony Martin, Kevin Friesen

Bibliographic record

VenueReport · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsHatch (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryLimitingBridge (graph theory)Transport engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Operations researchBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 41 span, 920m long Queensborough Bridge, constructed in 1960, provides a strategic daily link for 90,000 vehicles over the north arm of the Fraser River connecting New Westminster, BC. The Owner, the BC Ministry of Transportation (Ministry), initiated an in-depth scoping study to assess its current condition, as well as identify and analyze renewal treatment options to enable them to make informed decisions on managing the asset. The importance of limiting user delays was essential when evaluating potential treatment options. Multiple options for rehabilitation of the concrete deck as well as encapsulation and recoating scenarios for the steel girder coating was investigated. Life cycle cost analysis and conceptual traffic staging strategies were prepared. A qualitative assessment matrix, accounting for economics, traffic disruption and risk, was an effective tool in understanding, evaluating, and conveying recommendations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReportSame topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207