MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975754266 · doi:10.1198/016214504000002104

Are Maintenance Practices for Railroad Tracks Effective?

2005· article· en· W1975754266 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Statistical Association · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariatePoisson distributionTrack (disk drive)GrindingComputer scienceInterval (graph theory)StatisticsEconometricsEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Association of American Railroads wished to determine the effect of a maintenance practice known as grinding on the occurrence of rail fatigue defects and on the subsequent total traffic usage before a track must be replaced. Because a designed experiment was not practical, an analysis of historical data from the Canadian Northern Railroad is presented. In the analysis, certain covariate data are available, specifically the amount of grinding and some physical characteristics of the rail; other important covariate data are not available, however. A model for the number of defects as a function of traffic usage is developed based on a modulated Poisson point process. The model incorporates the effect of the available covariates and a mixture of Dirichlet processes set-up for the scale parameters of the individual rail sections that allows an assessment of the overall effect of the unavailable covariates. The model is then used to determine an optimal replacement period for a whole rail track. The analysis demonstrates that grinding reduces the expected number of defects and increases the optimal replacement interval.

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.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.251 · 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