MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220717775 · doi:10.1155/2022/7303346

Assessing the Dynamic Resilience of Local Roads: A Case Study of Flooding in Wuhan, China

2022· article· en· W4220717775 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhenwu Shi, Zifeng Yang, Jie Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Robustness (evolution)Flooding (psychology)Metric (unit)Computer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Transport engineeringChinaEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeographyOperations managementCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposed a modified metric inspired by the well-applied “resilience-triangle” framework to integrate the resilience concept within the traffic speed. Firstly, for setting the evolving normal functionality, this study added the concepts of robustness loss and rapidity to characterize and compare the recovery processes of local roads and assess the corresponding resilience under different traffic operation conditions. Secondly, these different evolving resilience patterns provide a quantitative benchmark for detecting the links between resilience and traffic operating conditions and exploring its impact on total resilience. Finally, this study simulated and compared the dynamic evolution of the total resilience of local roads, which accurately captured the weak and poorly resilient road locations. Our findings indicated that the proposed metric was quite efficient and accurate in assisting stakeholders to prioritize the transport planning and the retrofit projects of some specific local roads, which could improve the resilience of overall transport system significantly.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207