MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W573720666

Sensitivity Analysis to Assess the Impact of Truck Weight Reform on Bridge Network Costs

2007· article· en· W573720666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julius C. Chang, Michael J. Garvin

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 86th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckBridge (graph theory)Sensitivity (control systems)Range (aeronautics)EconomicsOperations researchEngineeringEconometricsActuarial sciencePublic economicsAutomotive engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major objective of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is the harmonization of truck weight standards among the three nations (United States, Canada, and Mexico) that are partners to the agreement. Prior assessments on the impact such a change would have on bridge-related costs in the US have relied on a single, conservative parameter (threshold overstress criterion) that is inconsistent with actual practice, a fact that limits the usefulness of the resultant cost estimates. This paper utilizes data from the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) in a sensitivity analysis that demonstrates a wide range of costs depending upon the threshold level employed. The notion of an optimal threshold level that minimizes bridge costs is defined conceptually. The overstress criterion is hence a critical parameter in studies of this type, a finding that should be a key consideration in future policy decisions regarding truck weight reform.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 86th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207