MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Railway Geohazards focusing on Sensitive Clay and GAM addressing Climate Change

2025· article· en· W4412904890 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Ruel

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsNordion (Canada)WSP (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental scienceEarth scienceGeologyPhysical geographyEnvironmental planningClimatologyGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Railway geohazards present unique challenges due to geotechnical factors affecting linear transportation infrastructures such as railways and pipelines, including construction, operations, reliability, and safety. Natural forces and geological processes continuously alter the earth’s surface, posing evolving risks to both existing and newly constructed tracks over time, such as active erosion, rockfalls, and landslides. The worsening effects of climate change are expected to increase the severity and frequency of these natural events. Champlain Sea glaciomarine deposits, in particular, pose significant risks due to their strain sensitivity to ground disturbances. To mitigate this risk category, a geoscientific large-scale overview of geomorphology is essential for assessing the vulnerability of existing tracks and for selecting new routes to ensure safe operation, especially in areas with sensitive clays. To ensure sustainable operational performance throughout the design life of railway or pipeline infrastructures, it is crucial to consider the impact of climate deterioration on natural events. Geotechnical assets, including protective measures, must be rigorously designed beyond typical design codes, as actual codes are often insufficient to meet the forthcoming challenges. This study focuses on scenarios highlighting the risks posed by landslide hazards on linear infrastructures within sensitive clays and emphasizes the necessity of a comprehensive risk management program that integrates climate-adapted mitigation measures as part of a long-term geotechnical asset management program (GAM).

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 venueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental ScienceSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207