MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W760385336

Oregon's Bridge-Delivery Program

2007· article· en· W760385336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas Lauer

Bibliographic record

VenueBridges Conversations in Global Politics and Public Policy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureBridge (graph theory)Context (archaeology)EngineeringBusinessProcess (computing)State (computer science)State legislaturePolitical scienceComputer scienceGeographyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to evidence that many of Oregon's bridges were weakening, the Oregon Legislature in 2003 approved $1.3 billion for the repair and replacement of bridges on the state highway system. This article describes the Oregon Department of Transportation's State Bridge Delivery Program, which will use this funding to repair or replace hundreds of bridges on major corridors throughout Oregon. A private company has been hired to assist in managing this massive program, which will be conducted in stages over a 10-year period. One of the key legislative mandates of the bridge program is to stimulate Oregon's economy by creating job and contracting opportunities, especially for Oregonians and Oregon-based companies. Over the life of the 10-year program, it will sustain an average of 2,500 jobs each year. Another important part of the program is ensuring that communities affected by construction projects have opportunity to provide input into the design and construction of bridges. A new collaborative framework called Context Sensitive and Sustainable Solutions has been developed to aid this process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2060.028

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBridges Conversations in Global Politics and Public PolicySame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207