Gestión del mantenimiento de pavimentos urbanos. Propuesta de implementación de un sistema de gestión de pavimentos en la ciudad de Valencia. Propuesta de implementación de un sistema de gestión de pavimentos en Valencia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[EN] Land transport infrastructures are one of the greatest goods of current world, which supposes an adequate conservation management. Specifically, maintenance works are especially important when countries reach higher levels of development what means that their transport networks tend to stabilize, reducing the need for investment in new projects. That is how appears the need to implement management systems that enable effective use of funds for the conservation of road infrastructure, getting the higher benefit from each monetary unit used in conservation. \nTherefore, it is from the 70s when some systems Pavements Management (SGP) are developed. Most of them were designed for application to intercity pavements. However, significant differences between these and urban pavements, required the development of specific tools for this management. \nUnited States of America (US), Canada and Australia are the countries with a stronger maintenance management in urban pavements tradition. Nevertheless, last years and due to the need to improve the efficiency of public administrations, has emerged the tendency to implement these models globally. \nThese systems are very different depending on the country and the models used in its development. For example, most African countries use models based on the HDM-4, a system developed by the World Bank. However, other continents like America use their own indices (PCI and PQI) with impairment and management models associated. Australia has used similar methodologies. Finally, Asia and Europe have not had a sufficient methodological roots to generate their own models. \nThis paper develops entirely a management system of pavement maintenance for the city of Valencia. This management system is based on the recommendations of municipal technicians and adapts to the requirements of low cost implementation and maintenance. In addition, technicians also required an intuitive and simple to implement that did not involve a change in the organizational structures of the institution system. \nThe system uses the evaluation from PCI indicator, which is widespread for evaluating urban US pavements. This indicator allows with a direct observation and without specific training to perform the classification of a pavement. On the other hand, alternatives prioritization is performed by a multi-objective method and includes technical, economic, social, political and environmental criteria. \nFinally, we checked if this system was better than a common evaluation and we conclude that this system improves not only the efficiency of the administration but also the citizens who use them. Moreover, the medium-term planning ensures funds and increases private investment by maintenance companies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".