Bibliographic record
Abstract
To improve the performance of the conventional nail laminated bridge deck, three generations of innovative decks have been developed during the last three decades: (a) the stress laminated wood deck, (b) the stressed log bridge, and (c) the grout laminated wood deck. The grout laminated wood deck, the most recent wood deck, consists of trimmed logs interconnected with internal grout cylinders, in compression or tension. Previous research has shown that the grout cylinders have superior load distribution characteristics, but the cost of trimming the treated logs was found to be relatively high. Recently, research has been conducted to develop the next generation of the bridge wood decks, called the anchored log decks. The anchored log deck, meant for use as decking of steel girder bridges, consists of untrimmed discarded utility timber poles which have been treated with preservatives. The logs are held together by means of unstressed transverse proprietary Cintec anchors. The anchors consist of stainless steel rods encased in grout cylinders. Panels, each comprising of 5 to 6 logs, are preassembled to fit on a flatbed trailer for shipping. The smooth wearing surface over the log deck is provided by longitudinal sawn timber planks, with high-density foam filling the gap between the logs and the planks. The panels are inter-connected through inclined anchors passing through adjacent logs. At the University of Manitoba, an anchored log deck with five preassembled panels was constructed and tested to failure at several locations under both static and fatigue loads. The test results have shown that anchored log decks have the potential of being economical preassembled decks for steel girder bridges.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.009 |
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".