MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311529871 · doi:10.1108/ci-04-2022-0083

Asset management-based resilience index formulation for pavements via principal components analysis

2022· article· en· W4311529871 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueConstruction Innovation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsset managementResilience (materials science)Index (typography)Asset (computer security)Principal component analysisComputer sciencePrincipal (computer security)Risk analysis (engineering)Operations researchEngineeringBusinessArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper extends the authors’ previous research work investigating resilience for municipal infrastructure from an asset management perspective. Therefore, this paper aims to formulate a pavement resilience index while incorporating asset management and the associated resilience indicators from the authors’ previous research work. Design/methodology/approach This paper introduces a set of holistic-based key indicators that reflect municipal infrastructure resiliency. Thenceforth, the indicators were integrated using the weighted sum mean method to form the proposed resilience index. Resilience indicators weights were determined using principal components analysis (PCA) via IBM SPSS®. The developed framework for the PCA was built based on an optimization model output to generate the required weights for the desired resilience index. The output optimization data were adjusted using the standardization method before performing PCA. Findings This paper offers a mathematical approach to generating a resilience index for municipal infrastructure. The statistical tests conducted throughout the study showed a high significance level. Therefore, using PCA was proper for the resilience indicators data. The proposed framework is beneficial for asset management experts, where introducing the proposed index will provide ease of use to decision-makers regarding pavement network maintenance planning. Research limitations/implications The resilience indicators used need to be updated beyond what is mentioned in this paper to include asset redundancy and structural asset capacity. Using clustering as a validation tool is an excellent opportunity for other researchers to examine the resilience index for each pavement corridor individually pertaining to the resulting clusters. Originality/value This paper provides a unique example of integrating resilience and asset management concepts and serves as a vital step toward a comprehensive integration approach between the two concepts. The used PCA framework offers dynamic resilience indicators weights and, therefore, a dynamic resilience index. Resiliency is a dynamic feature for infrastructure systems. It differs during their life cycle with the change in maintenance and rehabilitation plans, systems retrofit and the occurring disruptive events throughout their life cycle. Therefore, the PCA technique was the preferred method used where it is data-based oriented and eliminates the subjectivity while driving indicators weights.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.232 · 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