MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026756235 · doi:10.5539/mas.v6n9p68

Satisfying Statistical Constraints in Preparing Edited Variable Amplitude Loading History Using Genetic Algorithm

2012· article· en· W2026756235 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zulkifli Mohd Nopiah, Mohd Haniff Osman, Shahrum Abdullah, Mohd Noor Baharin Che Kamarudin, Izamarlina Asshari

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKurtosisSegmentationComputer scienceReduction (mathematics)AlgorithmInterval (graph theory)StatisticsRoot mean squareGenetic algorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major concern that surfaces when performing the segment-based fatigue data editing technique is to certify that the values of two global statistics (root mean square and kurtosis) of the edited load history are within an acceptance interval whilst maximizing the data reduction rate and minimizing the loss in damage. The root mean square (rms) quantifies an overall energy underlying the history whilst kurtosis is important to identify impulsive character. In this paper, the stochastic Genetic Algorithm (GA) is employed as a post processing tool that helps the edited history satisfy the statistical requirements with minimum cost i.e. small decrement in the initial reduction rate. Consider the initial version of edited history being composed of high fatigue damage segments resulted from the non-overlapping segmentation method. In a case that the history does not comply with the statistical requirements, then importing a subset of low segments into the present edited history might reverse the outcome. Thus, the GA aims to search for the smallest subset that turns the history into fulfilling the rms and kurtosis needs without affecting the reduction rate too much. Experimental results show the capability of the proposed method in making the edited history fit the statistical constraints without imposing harm on the overall fatigue damage value.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207