Bridge Rehabilitation Research Analytics | Five-State Evidence & Decision Support Platform

Five-state evidence map — current role, not invented universal weights

State / system	Decision mechanism	Documented factors / rules	Use in this platform
Florida FDOT bridge program / BMS	Condition classification + management/programming; current statewide composite rehab score not established here.	Current Performance Rating: 8–9 Excellent; 6–7 Good; 5 Fair; ≤4 Poor. Historical SD/FO/Health Index/Sufficiency Rating are not current FDOT calculations.	Condition analysis only from supplied data; no invented Florida score.
Texas HBP / Category 6	Eligibility + ordered priority until funds are exhausted.	Poor first; selected Fair cases include narrow deck, scour criticality, debris/scour history, and steel/timber piles. Safety programs add other thresholds.	Poor population is assessable; missing width/scour/history/pile variables remain gaps.
Texas TEBSS	0–100 eligible bridge selection score.	Current TEBSS existence/use verified; historical published weighting structure must not be presented as today's equation without current verification.	System acknowledged; no fabricated current weights.
Pennsylvania Bridge Risk Score	Multiplicative risk model used for state-owned bridge risk/ranking and programming support.	(√Deck Area × AADT) × F_scour × F_fc × F_det × F_aadtt × F_flood; condition is assessed separately.	Formula documented; cannot calculate fully from current 14 fields.
New York BRIDGE NY LBPI	Weighted 0–100 index + qualitative/engineering review.	Capital Need 47.5; Facility Importance 27.5; Restrictions 5; Risk/Resiliency 20. Includes general recommendation, structural deficiency, model recommendation, AADT, truck %, detour, postings, fracture critical, material/design, hydraulic vulnerability.	Framework documented; not calculable from current extract.
California SHOPP / HBP	Performance-driven, fiscally constrained programming and priority lists.	Current SHOPP emphasizes condition, seismic/scour vulnerability and operational limitations; HBP lists eligible scopes and priority-list fields. Historical scoring models are kept separate.	Current process described without inventing a current universal bridge formula.

Field	Role in analysis	Available?	Methodological note
State Name	State stratification	YES	Five-state comparison variable.
Structure Number	Bridge identifier	YES	Bridge-level traceability.
Owner Agency	Ownership/program context	YES	Useful for agency segmentation; not a universal priority weight.
Inventory Route NHS Code	Network classification	YES	Used descriptively/exploratorily; not assumed equivalent to criticality.
Bridge Condition	Primary condition classification	YES	Good/Fair/Poor as supplied; state-specific interpretation must be retained.
Deck / Superstructure / Substructure / Culvert ratings	Component condition	YES	Worst applicable component is a diagnostic measure; do not silently replace source overall condition.
Structural Evaluation Appraisal	Structural screening variable	YES	Preserved as supplied; interpretation requires source documentation before modeling.
Inventory Rating (US Tons)	Capacity-related descriptive variable	YES	Potential engineering screening variable; not treated as a universal priority weight.
Year Built	Age	YES	Validated before age calculation; suspicious PA records require source verification rather than deletion.
Average Daily Traffic	Traffic exposure / consequence proxy	YES	Log transform may support exploratory modeling; no universal official weight is claimed.
Deck Area (sq ft)	Bridge size / exposure	YES	Directly used in PA's documented risk formula; elsewhere treated as a descriptive/exploratory variable.

Agency	Source	Purpose
TxDOT	Highway Bridge Program	Current HBP eligibility and priority order.
TxDOT	Bridge System Safety Program	Higher-risk bridge and safety criteria.
TxDOT	Advanced Planning	Rehab vs replacement considerations.
PennDOT	2023 Transportation Asset Management Plan	Bridge Risk Score and risk-factor definitions.
PennDOT	Publication 55	Risk assessment and programming context.
NYSDOT	BRIDGE NY 2023 Planning Process Guidance	LBPI weights and decision stages.
NYSDOT	BRIDGE NY	Program purpose and current framework.
FDOT	Bridge Information	Current Florida bridge condition classification and historical metrics note.
Caltrans	2026 SHOPP	Current performance-driven and fiscally constrained programming context.
Caltrans	Highway Bridge Program	Current HBP scope and priority-list context.

Five-State Dataset Overview

State

Condition

NHS

Search structure / owner

Minimum age (years)

Maximum age (years)

Minimum AADT

Maximum AADT

Overall condition distribution

Poor-condition rate by state

LIVE DATA ANALYSIS

Interactive Five-State Bridge Analytics

Change the filters and the charts, bridge population, condition rates, and exploratory priority distribution update immediately from the embedded NBI-based records.

—bridges in current
analysis population

How to use this page

Select a state, condition, and NHS status.
Use the age and AADT controls to narrow the population.
Watch the histogram and state comparison update live.
Open Scoring & Prediction to tune factor weights.

Real supplied records No fabricated missing factors 2020 reference year Live recalculation in browser

Condition Distribution by State

Counts update with the current filters.

Poor-Condition Rate by State

Percentage of the filtered bridges classified as Poor.

Age Distribution

Valid Year Built records only.

Age vs AADT — Live Population

A sampled scatter plot for visual exploration; the underlying calculations use all filtered records.

Live Scoring & Prediction Lab

Research safeguard: this is an exploratory, tunable research score built only from fields available in the supplied five-state files. It is not an official DOT score and does not replace the documented NY/PA/TX/CA/FL decision systems. Missing state-specific factors are not invented.

Tune factor importance

Condition severity0.35

Good → Fair → Poor severity from the supplied condition field.

Bridge age0.25

Age normalized from validated Year Built.

AADT0.15

Log-transformed traffic exposure.

Deck area0.10

Log-transformed bridge size proxy.

Component severity0.10

Worst applicable deck/super/sub/culvert condition.

NHS exposure0.05

Exploratory network-classification factor.

What-if bridge scenario

Condition NHS Age (years) AADT Deck area (sq ft) Min component

0.000

Exploratory Priority Score · 0–1

MODERATE

Factor Weight Spider Chart

Live Score Histogram

Score distribution for the current analysis population.

Selected Bridge Score

Select a real bridge below to compare it with the what-if scenario.

Rank	State	Structure	Condition	Age	AADT	Component Min	Score

Bridge-Level Data — Actual Supplied Records

The table is calculated directly from the supplied records. Select a state/condition and search to inspect individual bridges. No synthetic factor values are used.

State
Condition
Rows
Search

State	Structure	Owner	Condition	Deck	Super	Sub	Culvert	Year	Age	AADT	Deck Area

Structural Components — No Aggregation Assumption

Component-level calculations use the NBI condition ratings supplied in fields 58, 59, 60, and 62. Numeric ratings are used; “N” is treated as not applicable/not rated. The component minimum is a descriptive worst-applicable-component metric, not a new weighted score.

State	Bridges	Deck poor ≤4	Superstructure poor ≤4	Substructure poor ≤4	Culvert poor ≤4	Any component poor	Known component min

Poor component counts

Overall vs. component classification

Progressive Bridge Population Filtering

This is the advisor-requested research workflow: reduce the large population transparently before detailed calibration. Filtering is descriptive; it does not imply a rehabilitation decision.

State	All bridges	Valid Year Built	Known condition	Known component	Fair/Poor	Poor

Age groups (2020 reference year)

Suspicious Year Built records

Formula Engine — Workbook-Based, Evidence-Constrained

Important: formulas are only calculated where all required inputs exist. Missing inputs are reported as unavailable rather than replaced with assumptions.

1. Bridge age

Age = 2020 − Year Built

Applied to every record with a valid Year Built.

2. Component minimum

Component Minimum = min(Deck, Superstructure, Substructure, Culvert), ignoring non-numeric “N” entries

Descriptive structural-condition metric. No arbitrary component weights.

3. Component poor indicator

Component Poor = 1 if any applicable component rating ≤ 4; otherwise 0

Used only to check the supplied overall condition field against component data.

4. Pennsylvania Bridge Risk Score

Risk = (sqrt(Deck Area) × AADT) × F_scour × F_fc × F_det × F_aadtt × F_flood

Workbook formula. Not calculated because the supplied files do not contain scour, fracture-critical, detour, truck percentage, or flood status.

5. New York BRIDGE NY LBPI

LBPI = Capital Need 47.5 + Facility Importance 27.5 + Restrictions 5 + Risk/Resiliency 20

Workbook subfactors include General Recommendation, Structural Deficiency, Model Recommendation, AADT, Truck %, Detour, Postings, Fracture Critical, Material Type, Design Type, Hydraulic Vulnerability. Not calculated from the supplied five-state files because those required inputs are incomplete.

6. Texas current HBP

Priority order: Poor → selected Fair cases (narrow deck, scour critical, debris/scour history, steel/timber piles)

The supplied data allow the Poor condition portion to be identified, but not the remaining criteria because width/scour/history/pile fields are absent.

7. Data-derived traffic exposure

log(AADT + 1)

Displayed as a descriptive transform only. It is not treated as a universal prioritization score or weight.

State-Specific Decision Systems & Factor Roles

The same variable is not automatically required in every state. This table follows the workbook's distinction between a factor being available, being used, and having a particular decision role.

State	System	Decision role	Documented formula/rule	Can calculate now?	Missing / limitation
New York	BRIDGE NY LBPI	Weighted score	47.5 Capital Need + 27.5 Facility Importance + 5 Restrictions + 20 Risk/Resiliency	Not calculable from supplied five-state files	Requires General Recommendation, Structural Deficiency, Model Recommendation, AADT, Truck %, Detour, Postings, Fracture Critical, Material Type, Design Type, Hydraulic Vulnerability.
Pennsylvania	Bridge Risk Score	Multiplicative risk formula	(sqrt(Deck Area) × AADT) × F_scour × F_fc × F_det × F_aadtt × F_flood	Not calculable from supplied five-state files	Scour, fracture-critical, detour, truck traffic, and flood status are not in the supplied 14-field datasets.
Texas	HBP / Category 6	Eligibility + priority order	Poor; then selected Fair cases: narrow <26 ft, scour critical, short spans over water with debris/scour history, steel/timber piles	Partially assessable	The supplied files have condition but not deck width, scour, span/debris history, or pile material.
Texas	TEBSS / Priority 1	0–100 selection score	Current existence/use verified; full current attribute-weight equation not supplied	Not calculable	Do not substitute historical TEBSS weights.
California	2026 SHOPP	Portfolio/programming	Performance-driven and fiscally constrained; no universal current bridge-level weighted formula in the supplied workbook	Not calculable as a single score	Current public process is not represented by a single bridge-level formula in the workbook.
California	HBP	Eligibility + priority list	Replacement/rehab/scour/preventive-maintenance eligibility and constrained programming	Not calculable as a single score	Public priority-list fields should not automatically be treated as weights.
Florida	Current bridge condition	Condition classification	8–9 Excellent; 6–7 Good; 5 Fair; ≤4 Poor	Condition calculable from supplied CAT10; component cross-check calculable	A current statewide composite rehabilitation score was not verified in the workbook.

Advisor-Requested Data Gaps

Factor / Variable	Current five-state files	Action	Reason
Deck / Superstructure / Substructure / Culvert	AVAILABLE	Use directly	Supports component-level variation and condition checks.
Material / structure type	NOT AVAILABLE	Join full NBI fields	Needed to segment concrete/steel/timber/type populations.
Lane count	NOT AVAILABLE	Join NBI/state fields	Needed for 1-, 2-, 3-, 4+ lane filtering.
Truck percentage	NOT AVAILABLE	State-specific source	Used in PA/NY/TX contexts but not present here.
Detour length	NOT AVAILABLE	External/later model	Advisor said keep it external for now; develop later if required.
Scour / flood	NOT AVAILABLE	Verify state role first	Do not force flooding/scour into every state.
Fracture criticality	NOT AVAILABLE	State/NBI join	Candidate risk modifier; role differs by state.
Postings / load restrictions	NOT AVAILABLE	State/NBI join	Engineering/eligibility role must be preserved.
Equity / community impact	NOT AVAILABLE	Later research layer	No current state formula in the workbook uses a published equity weight.
Year Built	AVAILABLE	Validate outliers	Six PA records have Year Built before 1800 and require source verification.

Next modeling gate: obtain the missing bridge-type/material/lane and state-specific decision variables first. Only after that should a state-specific rehabilitation model or optimization formulation be built.

Prepared by	Mostafa Sameer, PhD Candidate & Graduate Research Assistant
Institution	Florida International University (FIU)
Department	Moss School of Construction
Faculty Advisor	Dr. Wallied Orabi, Associate Professor

Interpretable Network Metrics for Equity-Aware Prioritization of Bridge Rehabilitation and Recovery

Research objective — rehabilitation prioritization under limited resources

What the evidence establishes

Evidence discipline

Decision architecture used throughout the research