MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407996729 · doi:10.1061/9780784485965.016

Pelican Creek Bridge Replacement Project—Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming

2025· article· en· W4407996729 on OpenAlexaff
Evan Garich, Brian J. Collins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsBGC Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelicanNational parkBridge (graph theory)ArchaeologyGeologyGeographyFisheryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Located on the East Entrance Road in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, the approximately 1,500-ft long Pelican Creek Bridge Replacement Project was completed in 2020, replacing an existing 197-ft long bridge and associated causeway that spanned the Pelican Creek Valley. The project is located near the north shore of Yellowstone Lake. The new bridge provided the opportunity to remove the approximately 1,300-ft long causeway, which was located within and bisected the Pelican Creek wetlands. Removal of the causeway provided significant environmental benefits by reconnecting wetlands and restoration of natural channel migration of Pelican Creek. The bridge is 9 spans and founded on large diameter open-end pipe piles. The soils at the site consist of liquefiable alluvial and lacustrine deposits. The site is within the Yellowstone Caldera and is an area of high seismicity. A peer-reviewed site-specific dynamic soil response analysis was conducted for the project. The recommended seismic design response spectra were much lower than the AASHTO standard procedure spectra at short periods. The liquefaction analysis demonstrated that portions of the soil profile were potentially liquefiable when subjected to design-level ground motions, and soils at the abutments were susceptible to lateral spreading. Ground improvement was performed at the abutments to mitigate the ground failure hazards associated with lateral spreading and lateral flow. The foundations consist of 24-in. pipe piles at the abutments and 42-in. pipe piles at the interior bents. Final design geotechnical investigations consisted of 18 borings and six cone penetration test soundings performed in 2016. Static analysis methods were supplemented with full-scale dynamic and static pile load tests at the site. A dynamic load test was performed on two piles at the site in 1997, when other projects were being constructed in the area. A dynamic and static load test program was completed in 2017. Following a 38-day setup period, the static load test was performed. Interpretation of the load test results, along with construction testing requirements, yielded pile lengths shorter than those calculated using static analysis methods. The reduction in pile length and number of splices required to be field welded resulted in significant time and cost savings to the contract. Due to the relatively short construction season in Yellowstone National Park, generally May to October, the reduction in pile lengths eliminated 1 year from the construction schedule.

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)0.000
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 score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207