Preliminary evaluation of Pier cap from an ASR affected bridge in Central Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Bridge, a highway bridge structure, was built using a suspected alkali-silica reactive aggregate in the 1960’s in a city in central Canada. Its concrete elements experienced rapid deterioration resulting in the need for costly increased repairs and rehabilitations. Alkali-silica reaction (ASR) is one of several damage mechanisms which might be contributing to damage of concrete elements. Infrastructure in central Canada experiences frequent freeze-thaw cycles, and heavy use of de-icing salts in winter as well as high heat and humidity in summer which might intensify distress. In recent years several concrete elements were selected for further assessment. Among them, five segments of a decommissioned Pier cap were selected for preliminary evaluation through visual inspection (conventional, semi-quantitative and quantitative using the cracking index) and non-destructive techniques (Schmidt hammer, ultrasonic pulse velocity and surface resistivity). Preliminary assessment results will be used to determine the appropriate locations (i.e., demonstrating the lowest/ highest deterioration) to extract cores for further assessment. Future work will be conducted on extracted cores using a multi-level assessment technique consisting of mechanical (compressive testing and stiffness-damage test) and microscopic procedures (the damage rating index and SEM) to assess the condition of the Pier cap.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it