MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W640767429

Investigation and Repair of the Diefenbaker Bridge Fracture

2013· article· en· W640767429 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R.M. Ellis, Rj Conner, M S Medhekar, David MacLaggan, M Bialowas

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
KeywordsGirderBridge (graph theory)BracingBermFlangeEngineeringFracture (geology)Forensic engineeringSection (typography)Span (engineering)Structural engineeringCivil engineeringGeotechnical engineeringBraceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Diefenbaker Bridge is a 7-span, 304m (1000 ft) long, fracture critical steel structure crossing the North Saskatchewan River in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada, constructed in 1959. On August 29th, 2011 a major fracture was found in one of the two steel girders of the southbound bridge. The crack extended from the bottom flange through the web of the girder, nearly full height of the girder and is one of the largest in-service bridge fractures to occur in Canada. The southbound structure was immediately closed and traffic was diverted to the parallel northbound structure. This paper describes the resulting fracture investigation and major structural repair implemented on the structure. Based on this investigation, the structure is believed to be susceptible to constraint-induced fracture (CIF). To repair the structure, the fractured bridge was supported on steel towers constructed on a river berm and raised to its original position. A section of the girder was then cut out and replaced with new steel and connected to the temporarily supported horizontal and vertical bracing. Once the structure was reopened to traffic, attention was turned towards rehabilitation including retrofit methods to mitigate approximately 160 CIF susceptible details in the southbound and northbound structures. The methods used to retrofit the CIF details are described along with lessons learned. The paper will be of interest to bridge owners, designers, and anyone involved in inspecting and maintaining bridge infrastructure. 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
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