MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410209270 · doi:10.1201/9781003559047-326

Key design aspects of Montreal Metro Blue Line extension tunnels

2025· book-chapter· en· W4410209270 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mehdi Bakhshi, Verya Nasri, Toufic Maalouf

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Extension (predicate logic)Line (geometry)EngineeringComputer scienceComputer securityMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Montreal Metro Blue Line extension spans 6 km from Saint-Michel to Anjou, featuring a two-track tunnel, five underground stations, and six auxiliary underground structures. Excavated by a 9.7 m diameter Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM), the tunnel is supported by a 350mm thick precast segmental lining system. This paper focuses on the TBM tunnel’s design, including alignment, geological conditions, spaceproofing, segmental lining geometry and fiber reinforced concrete properties, probing and pre-excavation grouting, instrumentation and monitoring. The structural design follows the latest standards, including ACI 533.5R-20, ACI 544.7R-16, and ITA WG-2, ensuring a robust and durable tunnel structure. This project incorporates innovative design, with a side-by-side tunnel configuration without a separating center wall, a first for North American metro systems. This project advances North American transit infrastructure to address geological challenges and ensure durability using design optimization, including tunnel configuration and lining thickness and material selection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207