Development of an ITS Strategy for Provincial Ring Roads, Edmontonand Calgary, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ring roads located in the Transportation and Utility Corridors surrounding both Edmonton and Calgary are in various states of planning, development and construction. Guiding Principle No. 3 from Alberta’s ITS Strategic Plan calls for ITS to be “well integrated in the planning, design, construction and maintenance of the transportation infrastructure”. There is currently an opportunity to establish a coordinated plan for the deployment of ITS solutions within both corridors, and potentially fast-tracking any high priority ITS solutions by taking advantage of current civil projects underway in these corridors. Guiding Principle No. 1 in Alberta’s ITS Strategic Plan calls for ITS to be “developed and deployed in a coordinated, systematic and cost-effective manner”. Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation and the Cities of Edmonton and Calgary are in various stages of planning and deployment of ITS. The development of a plan specific to the ring roads will provide the opportunity for coordination between the cities and Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation. A well thought out plan would give Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation the tools required to assist the traveling public, Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation and the Cities of Edmonton and Calgary with managing traffic within and around these corridors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".