MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031229943 · doi:10.1139/l10-128

Statistical vehicle classification methods derived from girder strains in bridges

2011· article· en· W2031229943 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Grant Rutherford, D.K. McNeill

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGirderBridge (graph theory)Artificial neural networkSpan (engineering)Computer scienceStrain gaugeFilter (signal processing)EngineeringStructural engineeringArtificial intelligenceData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Computer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the use of a pre-existing network of resistive strain gauges located on the girders of a single bridge span to determine the classification and estimate the weight of vehicles traveling over that span. Vehicle events on the bridge are identified automatically by a measurement filtering algorithm. Manual classification labels are then applied to a subset of these events to investigate the strain signal features that distinguish various vehicle classes. Trends in these features over time are investigated, and an estimate of vehicle weight is obtained from these features without the need for detailed knowledge of the structure's composition. Additionally, a number of neural network configurations are tested on the problem of determining vehicle class from these features. Results are tested on data from both the summer and winter seasons. Finally, estimates of vehicle weight are improved by using the classification network to filter input events.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207