The 102nd Avenue Bridge over Groat Road – Design Concept and Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The new 102nd Avenue Bridge over Groat Road in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada is a 113 m long “character” bridge that spans over Groat Road which is located in a 22 m deep ravine. The bridge replaced a 104 year old bridge on steel trestles. The selection of the replacement bridge had to take into account several factors including marginally stable steep ravine slopes and traffic disruptions in the urban environment. An integral abutment bridge design concept was developed, consisting of an 83 m long main steel span connected to 15.6 m long integral concrete abutments supported on hybrid steel and concrete piles at the back and sliding bearings at the front of each abutment. This concept created several design challenges: Thermal movement range is considered to be at the upper limits for integral abutment bridges; Potential for uplift at the back of the abutments due to the abutments acting as short back-spans; Force continuity between the 83 m steel span and the abutments; and Construction sequence required to connect the concrete abutments to the steel span. This paper presents the design concept and approaches, and construction methods for this structure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".