UN ANALISIS ECONOMICO SOBRE EL USO DEL CONCEPTO DE CONFIABILIDAD, EN RELACION CON ALGUNOS ELEMENTOS DEL PROYECTO GEOMETRICO DE CARRETERAS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este trabajo presenta un analisis economico sobre la aplicacion del concepto llamado confiabilidad en el proyecto geometrico de carreteras. Con dicho concepto se busca disenar las carreteras para velocidades mas congruentes con los deseos de los conductores. El valor de confiabilidad seleccionado es la fraccion de los usuarios, cuyos propositos quedaran satisfechos con el diseno realizado para ese valor. Tambien se analiza la pertinencia de diferentes valores de confiabilidad recomendados para distintas situaciones (tramos de carreteras troncales, alimentadoras o locales, etc). Se realizo un estudio bibliografico acerca de los estandares mexicanos de diseno, asi como de los manuales internacionales de Canada, Estados Unidos y Espana en busca de este concepto. Tambien se compararon diversas velocidades de proyecto de diferentes paises. Se realizaron analisis de velocidades de punto en diferentes sitios de la red carretera. Estos se compararon contra la teoria de aplicacion del concepto de confiabilidad. Se evaluaron las implicaciones en el costo de construccion de las carreteras, de la aplicacion de los criterios de confiabilidad, concluyendose que estos generan costos de construccion mayores y crecientes para los tipos de terreno en lomerio y montanoso en relacion con el terreno plano. Similares resultados se obtuvieron si se varia la confiabilidad segun el tipo de terreno. Se recomienda incorporar la confiabilidad en el proyecto geometrico de carreteras como un criterio de verificacion y revision de que lo proyectado, cumpla con los deseo de los usuarios. Se incluyen tablas,figuras, conclusiones y recomendaciones. This paper intends to analyze the economic impact of the use of the concept named reliability on geometric road design. Based on this concept the idea is to design roads which support velocities according to drivers' desires. The reliability value selected is the proportion of users whose desires are satisfied with the design done to that value. The pertinence of different reliability values recommended for several situations (main road segments, feeders or local, etc) is analyzed. A bibliographic research about design standards for Mexican roads is carried out, along with international manuals from Canada, United States and Spain, looking for the use of the concept of reliability. Besides, project speeds from different countries are compared. The implications, on road construction costs, of the application of the reliability criterion are assessed. It is concluded that the reliability criterion generates higher construction costs, particularly for rolling and mountainous terrain. Similar results are obtained if the reliability value is varied according to terrain type. It can be concluded that the implementation of the reliability criterion may lead to road designs which are more in agreement to the users' speeds and, by this mean, to better and safer geometric characteristics. It also leads to significantly higher construction costs. It is recommended to incorporate the reliability criterion on road geometric design as a verification criterion and for reviewing that the project will meet users' desires. Included tables, figures, conclusions and recommendations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".