MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W592703990

Local Calibration of MEPDG Distress Models for Flexible Pavements Using Ontario’s Long-Term PMS Data

2013· article· en· W592703990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gulfam Jannat, Xian‐Xun Yuan, Medhat Shehata

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 92nd Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRutPavement managementCalibrationTransport engineeringCluster analysisEngineeringChristian ministryInternational Roughness IndexCivil engineeringComputer scienceGeographyCartographyArtificial intelligenceAsphaltStatisticsMathematicsMechanical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local calibration is an important step before a transportation agency adopts the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide (MEPDG). This paper presents the challenges of and findings from the local calibration of flexible pavements in provincial highways under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). A calibration database was developed that involved a hierarchical framework of the input parameters required for DARWin-ME (the MEPDG software) and the historical field performance data based on the MTO’s second-generation pavement management system (PMS-2). A calibration-clustering-validation approach was taken for the local calibration. The analysis suggested that whereas the MEPDG provided fairly unbiased prediction of the IRI value, it often over predicted the total rutting. A further clustering analysis based on functional class and geographical zone for the rutting and IRI, respectively, improved the precision of the locally calibrated models.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 92nd Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207