MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293765160 · doi:10.1061/9780784484364.005

Geospatial Visual Analytics for Supporting Decision Making for Underground Utility Integrated Interventions

2022· article· en· W4293765160 on OpenAlexaff
Tersoo K. Genger, Amin Hammad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Transportation and Development 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeospatial analysisAnalyticsComputer scienceAsset managementVisual analyticsVisualizationData scienceData visualizationSanitary sewerDecision support systemAsset (computer security)Data analysisData miningEngineeringComputer securityBusinessRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When considering a holistic approach to infrastructure asset management, insights can be drawn from the visualization and interpretation of the multivariate data sets that capture the need for integrated interventions. The decision-making process associated with synchronized, integrated asset management can benefit from data fusion analytics. Previously, visual analytics has been applied to understand the processes associated with individual infrastructure assets such as bridges, pavements, sewers, etc. This research proposes using geospatial visual analytics to interpret and visualize an inventory of data collected from several sources, including annual average daily traffic (AADT), intervention plan, emergency repair data, water pipe networks, and excavation data. The aim is to analyze and determine the relationships between attributes of the data sets using statistical tools and geospatial analysis. Analyzing these relationships improves coordinated utility maintenance and repair, provides insight into the socio-economic impact of these activities, and helps select intervention alternatives while optimizing the costs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Transportation and Development 2022Same topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207