MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184463893 · doi:10.56748/ejse.131722

Sustainability Considerations for Underground Concrete Manholes

2013· article· en· W3184463893 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Reem Sabouni

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Journal of Structural Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecast concreteSustainabilityEngineeringCivil engineeringStructural engineeringReinforced concreteGeotechnical engineeringForensic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sewer systems enclose one of the harshest environments on concrete materials. These systems if made of concrete are usually accessed for maintenance and inspection by precast concrete manholes. The present design practices of these shafts components in Canada are generally conservative which results in heavily reinforced bases. If verified by full scale testing the code allows the use of alternative manhole design. To produce a more sustainable precast concrete manhole the steel reinforcement has to be minimized or even eliminated altogether if possible. In the course of introducing a more sustainable manhole a full scale load testing of non-reinforced base precast concrete manhole in a controlled laboratory environment was performed under critical configurations of the Ontario truck. This was followed by an extensive numerical investigation on the proposed manhole. The results showed that the proposed sustainable manhole can withstands applied loads without cracks in the shaft or its base. After verifying the structural validity of the proposed manhole design the sustainability of this design was evaluated. Also, a life cycle assessment scheme for precast concrete manholes was proposed. And the sustainability efforts in Precast Concrete manholes were summarizes

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic Journal of Structural EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207