MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Attachment of a crash-tested traffic barrier to a new bridge deck design in aluminium

2021· article· en· W3144125142 on OpenAlexaff
Charles-Darwin Annan, Martin Cormier, Mario Fafard

Bibliographic record

VenueReport · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation Safety and Impact Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrashworthinessCrashBridge deckBridge (graph theory)DeckStructural engineeringEngineeringCable glandAluminiumAutomotive engineeringComputer scienceForensic engineeringMaterials scienceFinite element methodComposite materialMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Traffic barriers are mounted on bridges to provide a physical impassable limit to redirect errant vehicles safely into the roadway. The desired level of performance is determined by the bridge usage and the roadway configuration; higher performance levels are associated with higher risk level for impact and severity of impact. Current design standards require that the designed traffic barrier and anchorage system be tested under real crash conditions to assure crashworthiness, i.e. satisfactory interaction with design vehicles. Certain modifications to an already crash-tested and approved barrier may be permitted if it can be demonstrated by advanced analysis that they would not adversely affect the designed performance of the barrier. This study seeks to evaluate the design of a connector for attaching an already approved traffic barrier on bridge decks made from welded multi-void aluminium extrusions. The attachment design facilitates installation, and is able to absorb vehicular impact loads without any permanent plastic deformation in the aluminium deck panel.</p>

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.280
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 teacher head, 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReportSame topicTransportation Safety and Impact AnalysisFrench-language works237,207