MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040149319 · doi:10.2749/vancouver.2017.0183

Structural Monitoring of a Closure Strip in the Staged Construction of a Slab-on-Girder Bridge on Highway 401

2017· article· en· W3040149319 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexander Au, Konstantinos Kris Mermigas

Bibliographic record

VenueReport · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGirderChristian ministryStructural engineeringBridge (graph theory)Closure (psychology)Settlement (finance)EngineeringSlabJoint (building)Prestressed concreteCivil engineeringForensic engineeringComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Highway bridges are routinely rehabilitated or replaced in stages to avoid lane reductions. In recent years, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has seen an increase in inquiries and concerns from engineers and contractors related to staging. Some of the potential problems relate to settlement and movement of plastic concrete due to live load vibration, and shear and rotation at the construction joint, resulting in compromised reinforcement bond and reduced concrete quality at the construction joint. In support of a recent guideline advising designers of issues that shall be considered when designing bridges rehabilitated or replaced in stages, the MTO monitored the Hwy 401 Westbound Collectors Bridge over the Ramp from the Hwy 401 WBL Express to DVP/Hwy 404, during replacement. The paper describes the bridge’s behaviour as the closure strip concrete sets up. The relative ratio of strain between girders across the closure strip provides an indication of the development of load transfer over time.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReportSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207