Infrastructural OpportunismI-11_A Next Generation Infrastructure Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federal transportation legislation known as MAP-21 brought renewed attention to a proposed interstate corridor (I-11) connectingLas Vegas and Southern Arizona to complete a new Canada to Mexico, or CANAMEX, corridor. Using I-11 as a case study, our studio explored three key ways otherwise status quo infrastructure can be transformed into innovative, sustainable solutions: by intervening in the design and planning process, by transforming the existing mono-functional freeway prototype, and by evolving the freeway paradigm from an “engineering only”to a “sustainability first” model. Students and faculty from architecture, planning and landscape architecture investigated the possibilities of transforming the proposed I-11freeway from a limited use, auto-dominant roadway (the “red arrow” scenario) into a sustainable, multi-functional, ecologically and socio-economically focused Super corridor (the“green arrow” scenario). The results of this work, summed up on this poster, exhibit the advantages of infrastructure opportunism –leveraging investments intended for status quo infrastructure towards more broadly inclusive, design-centric, next generation proposals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".