MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W816991478

Approach Fill Design of North Saskatchewan River Bridge

2009· article· en· W816991478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Af Ruban

Bibliographic record

Venue2009 ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA - TRANSPORTATION IN A CLIMATE OF CHANGE · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrestSetbackLeveeBridge (graph theory)Ring roadGeologyFloodplainHydrology (agriculture)GeographyCivil engineeringEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringCartographyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A perimeter ring road is being constructed around the City of Edmonton that is referred to as Anthony Henday Drive. Funding for the project is being provided by Alberta Transportation. The ring road alignment includes a crossing of the North Saskatchewan River in the southwest corner of the city. A 360 m long bridge was proposed for crossing the North Saskatchewan River. The short-term design for the crossing included two lanes in each direction with an ultimate design of eight lanes. Significant approach fills for the proposed bridge structures were required on both sides of the river. Based on the proposed vertical alignment, the maximum difference in height from the crest of fill to river level was approximately 35 m on the west side and 28 m on the east side. The width of the embankment at the crest is approximately 55 m, with sideslopes of 4H:1V. This equates to a footprint width of approximately 200 m on the floodplain that is present along the east side. Headslope angles for the embankments of 3H:1V were proposed, with a minimum setback of 20 m, for environmental considerations, from the crest of the riverbank to the toe of the approach fill. The primary focus of this paper is the approach fill design for the east side of the river.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.179 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2009 ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA - TRANSPORTATION IN A CLIMATE OF CHANGESame topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207