Resilient Roads in Challenging Terrain: A Case Study of Siddhartha Highway in Nepal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nepal is a country known for its diverse and challenging topography, and it relies heavily on a robust road infrastructure network to connect its remote regions and urban centers. This study addresses the critical need for enhanced road safety and infrastructure resilience on the Siddhababa road section of the Siddhartha Highway, Nepal, notorious for its high accident rates and susceptibility to landslides. Given the road's strategic importance in connecting remote regions and its challenging topographical conditions, our research aimed to identify the most suitable pavement type to mitigate these issues. Through a detailed examination incorporating eight different soil tests, alongside evaluations of traffic loads, weather conditions, and existing pavement performance, we adopted a comparative analysis methodology to assess the viability of flexible versus rigid pavements within this unique context. Results revealed that the soil composition and environmental conditions of the Siddhababa section significantly influence pavement performance, with specific gravity, moisture content, and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests indicating a nuanced suitability for both pavement types under varying circumstances. Our analysis concluded that, despite the economic and staged reinforcement benefits of flexible pavements, the durability, safety, and maintenance considerations favor the adoption of rigid pavement for the Siddhababa road section. However, acknowledging the economic constraints, a hybrid approach is recommended, emphasizing rigid pavements for the most vulnerable sections and flexible pavements elsewhere. This study contributes to the pavement engineering field by providing a model for pavement type selection in mountainous regions, aiming to enhance road safety and durability amidst challenging environmental conditions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".