Bibliographic record
Abstract
The McLeod River Bridge is a four span bridge with 33.5 metre long prestressed concrete girders supported on reinforced concrete piers and abutments. The pier foundations are spread footings keyed into shale bedrock. Over the past 25 years the river has shifted within its bed and now strikes the piers at an angle of approximately 40 degrees. This angle of attack has resulted in scour at the piers, particularly at the centre pier (Pier 2). At Pier 2 the scour level adjacent to the pier extends to 1.5 metres below the bottom of the footing. In January 2000, Alberta Transportation decided that a permanent structural solution was required to protect Pier 2 against failure due to scour and that the pier required protection prior to spring breakup. The time frame available to carry out the design and construction of the required work was less that 12 weeks. This aggressive schedule could only be achieved through close cooperation between the client (Alberta Transportation), consultant (UMA Engineering), environmental approving agencies and those contractors invited to tender for the work on an invitational tender basis. A structural solution, involving the use of large drilled piles into each end of an extended pier shaft was developed to underpin Pier 2. The underpinning was designed to ressist ice loads striking the pier at angles of up to 40 degrees. After the completion of the design, a decision was made to delay the construction of the underpinning until the fall of 2000 due to a mild winter and the anticiation of an early spring breakup. Construction began in September 2000 and was completed in December 2000. The cost of the work, including the placing of rock riprap, was approximately $800,000. For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD number E201066. (A)
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".