Revised Dowel Bar Tolerances for Ontario Concrete Pavements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective load transfer is a key design element for jointed plain concrete pavement and has a significant impact on long-term pavement performance. To facilitate load transfer and to allow expansion and contraction of the joints, dowel bars should be placed parallel to the vertical and horizontal planes of the pavement. In the past, it was difficult to verify the alignment of dowel bars within a concrete pavement. Recently, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation was given the opportunity to verify dowel bar alignment with an innovative non-destructive technique known as magnetic imaging tomography (MIT). The MIT scan was found to be a quick and accurate method of measuring dowel bar alignment across a transverse joint, allowing real-time, non-destructive assessment of the dowel bar alignment at joints throughout a concrete paving contract. In Ontario, MIT scan data collection and analysis during concrete paving led to process and equipment improvements. The MIT scan was rapidly adopted both as a quality control tool for the contractor and a quality assurance tool for the ministry. Based on data collected over several paving seasons, changes were made to ministry specifications and dowel bar tolerances. The revised dowel bar tolerances for Ontario pavements are presented in this paper.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".