MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943075607 · doi:10.2749/vancouver.2017.1521

The Existing Champlain Bridge – Assessment Using Refined Analyses

2017· article· en· W2943075607 on OpenAlexaff
Denis Mitchell, William D. Cook, Bruno Massicotte, Emre Yildiz

Bibliographic record

VenueReport · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGirderStructural engineeringFinite element methodBridge (graph theory)EngineeringCorrosionLinear elasticityMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to evaluate the performance of the post-tensioned I-girders and diaphragms in the existing Champlain Bridge, a combination of 3D linear and 2D non-linear finite element analyses were carried out. After 55 years in service, many girders are experiencing deterioration. The results from the 3D analyses enabled the determination of the loads applied to individual girders and diaphragms for the non-linear analyses. The 3D analyses also enabled the determination of the redistribution of forces in the structure due to different degrees of corrosion of the tendons in the girders. The 2D non-linear finite element analyses captured the responses of the girders and diaphragms and enabled an assessment of the performance under service and factored loads. The degrees of corrosion of the tendons and the stirrups were estimated from inspection results. The effects of different strengthening measures were also assessed using this approach.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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