MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012018420 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2019-0559

Resilience-based optimization model for maintenance and rehabilitation of pavement networks in a freeze–thaw environment

2020· article· en· W3012018420 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ahmed Mohammed, Soliman Abusamra, Tarek Zayed, Ashutosh Bagchi, Fuzhan Nasiri

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Asset managementPavement managementInvestment (military)Asset (computer security)Computer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental resource managementTransport engineeringBusinessEngineeringEnvironmental scienceFinanceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the Canada infrastructure report 2016, 62.6% of roads in Canada are in a good condition, nevertheless, with current investment rates, significant road networks will suffer a decline in their condition and will be vulnerable to sudden failure. Accordingly, this paper tackles the pavement resilience from an asset management perspective and aims at developing a resilience-based asset management framework for pavement networks. This was carried out through the development of five components: (i) a central database of asset inventory, (ii) a pavement condition and level of service assessment models, (iii) a regression of the effect of freeze–thaw on pavement network, (iv) a financial and temporal models, and (v) an optimization model to formulate the mathematical denotation for the proposed resilience assessment approach and integrate the above components. The model results were promising in terms of maintaining pavement resiliency by selecting a near optimal intervention plan that meets the municipality limitations.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207