MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W610052355

GOOD WINTER MAINTENANCE BOOSTS ROAD SAFETY

2002· article· en· W610052355 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R W Stidger

Bibliographic record

VenueBetter roads · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIcingSnowSnow removalTransport engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMeteorologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While plowing and salting to de-ice are still important in winter road maintenance, the reported use of anti-icing strategies is growing quickly. According to a survey sponsored by members of the Strategic Highway Research Program's Anti-Icing/RWIS Lead States Team, 86% of states responding to the survey planned to expand or start anti-icing. Between 1997 and 1999, the proportion of DOT vehicles equipped for anti-icing rose from one-in-10 to one-in-five. The number of lane miles treated jumped 50% in the same period. About 75% of the states responding to the survey used Road Weather Information Systems to help determine the need for anti-icing. All of the states were using embedded pavement sensors. Anti-icing was less popular in Canada, the survey indicated. Half of Canada's 10 provinces reported using anti- icing on a total of 2.3% of their lane miles. Meanwhile, researchers at Michigan Technological University's Institute of Snow Research are developing a new technology called Anti-Icing Smart Overlays. By gluing ground rock to the pavement with epoxy, engineers hope to create an overlay that soaks up de-icing chemicals so they won't need to be reapplied every time it snows. A likely first use is on highway bridges.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

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)0.0170.011

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 head0.192
Teacher spread0.183 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBetter roadsSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207