MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7012906843

Proyecto caminos

2017· dissertation· es· W7012906843 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuerenati · 2017
Typedissertation
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlock (permutation group theory)Seismic zoneQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De acuerdo con las Normas para el Estudio de Carreteras actual entre en vigencia, la carretera materia del presente proyecto por las características que nos fueron especificadas, puede ser clasificada como de Primera clase en terreno de topografía plana, Pero como la topografía del terreno en que debe construirse la carretera no es plana, como se puede deducir observando el plano que nos fue entregado con el presente proyecto; sería anti-técnico y anti-económico construir en dicho terreno un camino cuya curva mínima sería de 340 metros de radio, curva que se podría locar en el traza A - C a costa de grandes movimientos de tierra, pero que sería casi imposible de locar en la zona cercana al pueblo B.\nConsiderando pues, que la topografía del terreno no es plana; sino, que podemos considerarla como ondulada en las partes bajas y accidentada en las partes altas, es que en el presente proyecto doy características de carretera de Primera clase en terreno de topografía ondulada al trazo A - C y de carretera de Primera clase en terreno de topografía accidentada al trazo del ramal á B.\nPor lo tanto, las características adoptadas serán: Características del trazo A - C:\nVelocidad directriz\t 60 km. por hora.\nPendiente máxima\t 3.5 %\nAncho superficie rodadura\t6.60 m.\nAncho bermas\t\t1.00 m.\nCaracterísticas del trazo del ramal á B:\nVelocidad directriz\t45 km. por hora.\nPendiente máxima\t3.5 %\nAncho superficie rodadura\t6.00 m.\nAncho bermas\t0.50 m.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuerenatiSame topicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207