MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6991858533

Infrastructure asset management: how does Canada compare to Australia and New Zealand?

2006· article· en· W6991858533 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsset managementAsset (computer security)Process (computing)Quality (philosophy)Developing countryAsset quality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infrastructure has become a major preoccupation for many countries around the world. Developed countries, such as Canada, face the challenge of maintaining their existing stocks of water, wastewater, roads, bridges, and other systems that support economic growth and help maintain the quality of life of their citizens. Meanwhile, developing countries are in the process of building their infrastructure systems to provide basicservices to their people. Asset management is not new to infrastructure, having been first applied with pavement management systems more than 20 years ago. Today, the principles of asset managementhave been expanded and applied to all municipal infrastructure assets.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.015
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicNeonatal Health and BiochemistryFrench-language works237,207