MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W842264382

PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION CONTRACTS: THE QUEBEC EXPERIENCE TO DATE

2002· article· en· W842264382 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicole Rioux

Bibliographic record

VenueRoutes/Roads · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWarrantyConfusionConstruction contractContract managementProcess (computing)BusinessDriver rehabilitationEngineeringOperations managementTransport engineeringEngineering managementRehabilitationComputer sciencePolitical scienceMarketingLawPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past few years, many jurisdictions have experimented performance specifications in construction contracts. There is still some confusion in the highway construction community about what performance specifications exactly are. This article clarifies the matter and reports on Quebec experience with specifications setting out time-based performance criteria for rehabilitation projects. In 1995, the Ministere des Transports du Quebec awarded its first major road repair contract containing pavement warranties. Two similar contracts followed in 1997 and 1999. This type of contract, which covers design, rehabilitation, and maintenance by the contractor during the warranty period, is based on performance specifications. This article compares the administrative and technical aspects of the process with those of the conventional contract award methods.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoutes/RoadsSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207