MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W649619672

Application des routes 2+1 au Quebec

2011· article· fr· W649619672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M Fressancourt, Simon Labonté

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis de nombreuses annees, le ministere des Transports du Quebec (MTQ) souhaite diminuer le nombre de collisions frontales sur son reseau routier. Il s'agit du type d'impact le plus recense lors d'une collision qui cause la mort sur les routes de la province du Quebec. Differents amenagements et mesures ont ete implantes, mais les collisions frontales constituent toujours une preoccupation pour le ministere dans la poursuite d'une amelioration globale du bilan routier. Aussi, pour diminuer le risque de collisions, plusieurs conversions de routes a deux voies contigues en autoroutes sont realisees, alors que les debits vehiculaires sont faibles. L'impact economique et environnemental de la conversion est aussi important dans un contexte de developpement durable. En Europe, un concept de route a ete developpe : il s'agit des routes de type 2+1. Cette conception geometrique s'inscrit dans un mouvement de reflexion de nouvelle facon de faire qui a debute dans les annees 1990, ou certains pays europeens avaient comme objectif la diminution importante des collisions mortelles/blessures corporelles et ce, en respectant les finances publiques des pays et le developpement durable. Les premieres experiences de l'application des routes 2+1 demontrent des gains satisfaisants au niveau de la securite et de la circulation. Pour la fiche generale du congres voir numero de controle 201111RT334E.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207