MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036095940 · doi:10.1115/jrc2010-36208

The Canadian Pacific DGRMS: The First Use of Deployable GRMS in a Production Mode

2010· article· en· W2036095940 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jeffrey A. Bloom, Ron Gagne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Pacific Railway (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAxleShakedownEngineeringMode (computer interface)Production (economics)Production system (computer science)Automotive engineeringMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Deployable GRMS (DGRMS), which is capable of testing gage restraint at 50 mph, was originally developed for the FRA in 2004. Gage Restraint Measurement systems use a hydraulically loaded split axle to laterally push outward on each rail to expose gage restraint weaknesses. The DGRMS is the first system to utilize a deployable fifth axle instead of a running axle for this purpose. The FRA prototype system has been used in FRA research projects but not in a year-round daily production mode. Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) procured the first production system that was installed on a box car and placed the system into service in February 2009. The first six months of service was used for equipment shakedown which resulted in a robust daily production system. The resultant system is being used year-round by CP, even on snow-covered rails. This paper describes the CP experience, the results of the test program, and new improvements in the technology.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207