MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W603505557

Development of a Pavement Degradation Fee Structure for the City of Toronto

2013· article· en· W603505557 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Mouaket, Na Capano

Bibliographic record

Venue2013 CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA - TRANSPORTATION: BETTER - FASTER - SAFER · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Transport engineeringReliability (semiconductor)DilemmaBusinessQuality (philosophy)Engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Utility cuts contribute to a reduction in overall service-life of pavements. This results in an additional financial burden of costly rehabilitation and maintenance work by municipalities to maintain prematurely deteriorated pavements. Cities are allowed to recover the costs they incur as a result of allowing utility companies to use its roads to install their distribution systems. The City of Toronto, faced with this dilemma, decided to recoup such costs by developing a fair pavement degradation fee structure that is technically justified and legally defensible. The paper will discuss the following topics: - Background and terms of reference for the pavement degradation fee study - The experimental design - Quality assurance measures that guaranteed reliability of field information gathered - The statistical tests that were used to identify impacts - The economic evaluation undertaken to estimate the value of the impacts - The development of the pavement degradation fee structure. The paper presents the final fee structure and a quick comparison with other jurisdictions' charges with explanations of potential differences. (A) For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD record number 201310RT334E.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2013 CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA - TRANSPORTATION: BETTER - FASTER - SAFERSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207