MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W330366406

Value Engineering of a Spliced Girder Bridge Produces Pretensioned Concrete Records

2004· article· en· W330366406 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amgad M Girgis, Dennis Drews, Maher K. Tadros

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicValue Engineering and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecast concreteGirderSpan (engineering)Bridge (graph theory)Structural engineeringEngineeringPrestressed concrete
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A single point interchange bridge construction contract in Omaha, Nebraska was awarded to Hawkins Construction Company in 2003. The bridge is expected to be completed in the summer of 2004. The single span bridge has a length of 63 m (206.7 ft) and an overall width of 35.4 m (116 ft.). It utilizes NU2000PT Nebraska1 post-tensioned standard I girders. The original design called for three girder segments per girder line, with two cast-in-place concrete splice joints. An investigation into the possibility of making the NU2000 girders in a single 63 m piece was underway at the time of writing this abstract. If successful, it will be a record piece length in Nebraska, and possibly in the U.S. The web of the precast pretensioned girder would only be 150 mm (5.9 in.) wide, which is the standard pretensioned beam web width in Nebraska. The North American record length is currently held by the 65 m NU2800 spliced girders used for the Bow River Bridge near Calgary, Alberta, Canada. However, those pieces were deeper, had less pretensioning, and were wider due to post-tensioning requirements. This paper describes the engineering and construction issues faced in the design, handling, shipping, and erection for these very long, slender and highly pretensioned girders.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicValue Engineering and ManagementFrench-language works237,207