MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410288882 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2024-0167

Alignment planning and network optimization of auxiliary roads for overhead power transmission line facility construction

2025· article· en· W4410288882 on OpenAlex
Hongtai Yang, Xiang Liu, Zijian Yang, Xiaozhao Lu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesDepartment of Science and Technology of Sichuan Province
KeywordsOverhead (engineering)Electric power transmissionLine (geometry)Network planning and designTransmission networkTransmission (telecommunications)Power (physics)Computer scienceTransmission lineEngineeringPower transmissionTransport engineeringTelecommunicationsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To deploy overhead power transmission lines in a mountainous region, an auxiliary road (AR) network must be built to interconnect the site for pylons and the nearby existing roads, which poses challenges in safety, cost, environment, and efficiency. This research proposed a two-phase methodology: (1) auxiliary road alignment optimization (ARAO); (2) road network layout optimization (RNLO). ARAO devised the improved Dijkstra algorithm (IDA) to plan, under geometric design constraints, the AR alignments with minimal construction costs. RNLO utilized the genetic algorithm (GA) to screen out the AR network layout with minimal gross cost. The case studies substantiated the methodological superiority: compared with the human-planned design, the IDA-generated design curtailed excavation volume and total road length substantially. IDA planned the alignments with uplifted efficiency and shortened project duration. The IDA-plus-GA can optimize the network layout with minimal gross cost and robust adaptiveness to environmental constraints (e.g., forestry, waterbody, etc.).

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.

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 score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.184 · 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