MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W352342737 · doi:10.33593/iccp.v1i1.1171

CANADIAN FORCES EXPERIENCE IN SLIP FORMING AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS

2025· article· en· W352342737 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T. S. W. Harvey, J. McLean

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Concrete Pavements · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicEngineering and Material Science Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlip (aerodynamics)Forensic engineeringGeologyEngineeringMaterials scienceAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The project at Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake in Alberta involved constructing a 10,000-foot runway in response to urgent pilot training needs. The base faced a rush job due to limited surveys and advanced planning. The runway's previous structure consisted of layers of asphalt and gravel over granular subbase. However, its asphaltic surface deteriorated quickly, prompting resurfacing attempts that didn't hold up. In the new project, engineers decided on a slip-formed overlay to replace the old surface. This method was crucial because of strict timelines and soil stability issues. The new pavement used grooves to improve drainage, and pilots reported better braking and a smoother landing experience. The project was completed ahead of schedule, with only minor cracking after a year, suggesting it would significantly outlast the old surface. Despite some issues with sealant bonding, the project was deemed a success. The quality of the new pavement, its stability, and excellent riding qualities offered an improvement that met the Canadian Forces' needs. (Abstract generated by AI tool ChatGPT 4)

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Conference on Concrete PavementsSame topicEngineering and Material Science ResearchFrench-language works237,207