MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design of Champlain Bridge in Canada

2025· article· zh· W7125520996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
XIE Yaning, ZHOU Yanfeng, Marwan Nader

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPierBridge (graph theory)Span (engineering)Beam bridgePrecast concreteGirderDeck

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Champlain Bridge, an iconic gateway spanning the St. Lawrence River in Montreal, showcases not only the excellence of engineering but also becomes an integral part of the city’s landscape. With a main span of 240 m, the bridge employs a unique single-pylon harp-shaped double-plane cable-stayed structure. The upper pylon is inspired by a tuning fork in its lateral design, while the upper crossbeam artfully mimics the shape of a bow tie, endowing the bridge with a visual beauty that harmoniously blends elegance and strength. The bridge deck, with a total width of 60 m, was the widest double-plane cable-stayed bridge in the world when it was completed. The typical spans of approach bridges on both sides are 80.4 m and 84.0 m, respectively, and the main girder adopts a large cantilever steel‑concrete composite box girder. The pier design is equally distinctive, featuring W-shaped steel pier caps that complement the inclined pier shafts, enhancing the visual hierarchy of the structure. The exposed structural elements collectively form a unique landscape element, seamlessly blending into the local temporal and spatial environment. The main bridge foundation utilizes cast-in-drilled-hole piles, while the approach foundations primarily adopt spread footings, with a few exceptions using piles. Based on construction and transportation conditions, the gird height and span were determined, and a rational structural segmentation was implemented. The industrialized construction techniques, featuring extensive use of precast segments, encompass the main girder, steel pier caps, pier shafts, and spread footings. This significantly improves product quality and efficiency while reducing environmental impact during construction, embodying the concept of green construction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207