MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards accurate ice accretion and galloping risk maps for Quebec: A data-driven approach

2025· article· en· W4407636788 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Abdeslam Jamali, Reda Snaiki, Ahmed Rahem

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Regions Science and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAccretion (finance)MeteorologyClimatologyEnvironmental scienceGeologyPhysical geographyGeographyPhysicsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ice accretion poses a significant threat to infrastructure and public safety, particularly in regions prone to severe winter weather. Accurate ice accretion hazard mapping is essential for effective risk management and mitigation. While substantial progress has been made in mapping these hazards, most existing ice accretion maps rely on calculated ice accretion values rather than direct measurements, leading to potential inaccuracies. To address these limitations, this study leverages field measurement data from Hydro-Québec's glacimètre network to develop refined ice accretion maps for Quebec. The maximum annual ice accretion thicknesses are extracted, and a rigorous probability distribution fitting analysis is applied to generate 10-, 30-, and 50-year return period values. These values are interpolated using both inverse-distance weighted interpolation (IDWI) and kriging techniques, allowing for a comparative evaluation of interpolation methods. Additionally, galloping risks are assessed using the Performance-Based Ice Engineering (PBIE) framework, producing galloping risk maps for various return periods. By incorporating real-world data and comparing interpolation approaches, this research enhances the accuracy of ice accretion and galloping risk maps, providing more reliable hazard assessments for Quebec's infrastructure. • Development of refined ice accretion maps using field measurements. • Comparison of IDWI and kriging for ice accretion interpolation. • Assessment of galloping risk using the PBIE framework. • Identification of significant spatial variability in ice and galloping risk

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Regions Science and TechnologySame topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207