MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W600786222

Pavement System Suiting Local Conditions

2008· article· en· W600786222 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brahim Benmokrane, M. S. Eisa, Sherif El-Gamal, D Thébeau, Ehab El-Salakawy

Bibliographic record

VenueACI Concrete International · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryCorrosionConcrete coverReinforced concreteForensic engineeringEngineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceStructural engineeringComposite material
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 1990s, the Ministry of Transportation of Quebec (MTQ) has placed renewed emphasis on constructing long-lasting concrete pavements suiting local traffic and climatic conditions. In 2000, these efforts led to the installation of Canada's first roadway with continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP). However, 5 years later, concerns were raised about the long-term performance of CRCP, as portions of this initial installation were found to have insufficient cover over the bars, and core samples showed that the longitudinal reinforcement was corroding at transverse cracks. These observations led the MTQ to select galvanized steel as the standard reinforcement for subsequent CRCP projects and to continue investigating other systems with enhanced corrosion resistance. As part of these investigations, the MTQ and the University of Sherbrooke began studying the use of glass fiber-reinforced polymer bars for CRCP in September 2006. A stretch of test pavement has since been constructed on eastbound HW-40 in Montreal. This article summarizes the design concepts, construction details, material properties, early-age behavior, and preliminary monitoring results for this test pavement after 18 months in service.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACI Concrete InternationalSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207