Utilities in Multi-Purpose or Shared Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With population growth, expansion of industrial demands, and the challenges of installing high voltage (HV) and extra high voltage (EHV) cables in dense urban and other locations, structures such as tunnels and bridges for multi-purpose use are becoming attractive options. They offer the potential for reduced overall costs, environmental advantages, and less disruption to the community during the installation, maintenance, and replacement of cables and other utilities. The International Council on Large Systems (CIGRE) released a Technical Brochure 403 in 2010 through Working Group B1.08 titled “Cable Systems in Multi-Purpose or Shared Structures.” This brochure was developed to (1) establish the appropriate terminology; (2) collect global data on the experience with the use of multi-purpose and shared structures for the installation of cable systems; (3) provide a survey of technical aspects, such as types of cables, design of the structure, installation, mutual impacts among the utilities, maintenance, and operational constraints; (4) provide economic, occupational health and safety aspects, administrative matters, legal aspects, and decision-making process; (5) summarize and review the information to identify the issues that need to be considered when installing insulated cables systems in multi-purpose or shared structures; and (6) recommend guidelines for the use of cables in such structures.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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".