MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051509194 · doi:10.1088/0964-1726/10/3/320

Structural health monitoring of innovative bridges in Canada with fiber optic sensors

2001· article· en· W2051509194 on OpenAlexafffundabout
R. C. Tennyson, Aftab A. Mufti, Sami Rizkalla, Gamil Tadros, Brahim Benmokrane

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersMinistère des TransportsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsStructural health monitoringBridge (graph theory)Fiber Bragg gratingOptical fiberFiber optic sensorReliability (semiconductor)Structural engineeringMeasure (data warehouse)EngineeringFiberComputer scienceMaterials scienceTelecommunicationsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the development and application of fiber optic sensors for monitoring bridge structures. Fiber Bragg gratings (FBGs) have been used to measure static and dynamic loads on bridge decks and columns, including composite repairs for rehabilitation purposes. A new long gage concept that permits overall average strains to be measured has also been developed with gage lengths varying from 1-20 m. These gages can be bonded to the concrete structure or imbedded in the composite repair patch. Six projects undertaken by ISIS Canada to incorporate fiber optic sensing to monitor the structural health of bridges in Canada are described. Data will be presented for several bridges that indicate a measure of system reliability over several years in a hostile environment. The benefits of fiber optic sensors will be highlighted.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations229
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207