MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127468403 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2019-0465

Material application methodologies for winter road maintenance: a renewed perspective

2021· article· en· W3127468403 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sen Du, Michelle Akin, Dave Bergner, Gang Xu, Xianming Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinnesota Department of TransportationU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsBrineSustainabilityHighway maintenanceSnowEnvironmental scienceTransport engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Winter roadway operations, commonly known as snow and ice control operations, are one of the most critical functions of state, provincial, and local transportation agencies in cold regions. These operations aim to provide safety and mobility through the timely and effective application of materials and mechanical removal. The most common materials used are salt (sodium chloride, solid or liquid brine), magnesium chloride-based, calcium chloride-based deicers, agro-based additives and blends, and abrasives. In practice, the specific choice and application method and rate of these materials are dependent on pavement temperature, precipitation type, level of service goals, budget, and environmental sustainability considerations. Best practices of material application are designed to apply the right type and amount of materials in the right place at the right time. This review presents a literature review and agency interviews that were conducted to gather information about the use of materials, including types of materials, application strategies, application rates, and application equipment.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207