MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W561532588

Performance Measures for Snow and Ice Control in Province of Alberta, Canada

2006· article· en· W561532588 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roy Jurgens, Lynne Cowe Falls, Jack Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 85th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerformance measurementSuiteSnowSnow removalAsset (computer security)Environmental resource managementControl (management)Environmental scienceComputer scienceBusinessMeteorologyGeographyComputer security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performance measurement is a vital component of asset management, which is used in planning and programming to identify assets that are under or over performing and to assess overall performance over time. As part of the move to asset management, Alberta Transportation has implemented performance based planning and monitoring of the provincial highway network. Three performance measures, based upon technical measurement, have been adopted which characterize network condition, functional adequacy and utilization. However, Alberta, like the rest of Canada, is a winter province yet no clear suite of performance measure has been developed for snow and ice control. Traditionally, agencies have measured inputs (such as salt or sand) or outputs (such as plowing frequencies), but none of the existing measures address effectiveness. This paper presents the results of a project to develop winter performance measures that address both the planning and operations of a large rural highway network. Preliminary results indicate that traffic volumes and speed data can be used to identify major storm events and as such may hold promise as repeatable, robust, relevant and responsive performance measures.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 85th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207