MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130996920 · doi:10.3141/2289-12

Source of Ballast Fouling and Influence Considerations for Condition Assessment Criteria

2012· article· en· W2130996920 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Ruel, Steven M. Chrismer

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux Cavendish
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBallastTrack (disk drive)Track geometryWarning systemRisk analysis (engineering)Reliability engineeringEngineeringForensic engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringTelecommunicationsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Railway ballast is a critical element in the railway track support structure. The ballast is often overlooked when inspection tools are developed for track. When ballast is not functioning correctly, the strength of the track structure may be inadequate and thus compromise track stability. Track stability–related failures vary from rapid deterioration with little warning to slow and progressive deterioration with often predictable required maintenance. Ballast-related deterioration is progressive and usually provides visual evidence to warn maintenance personnel of needed rehabilitation. However, the blocked drainage that develops with fouled ballast can result in a saturated roadbed that is not stable and could rapidly deteriorate to an unsafe condition with little warning. Although massive failures are rare, if a side hill fill or embankment deteriorates to the point of becoming susceptible to massive failure, then the challenge becomes evaluation. More detailed knowledge of the track support condition will be needed for a thorough evaluation than can be provided by current track inspections, except for costly detailed visual inspections. The current standard of practice for ballast inspection and maintenance can be improved to reduce the risk of sudden failure. Much of the required technology, knowledge, and resources is already available and being utilized under the current system. A more precise evaluation of ballast condition is essential to identify thresholds related to unsafe track support conditions and to support effective maintenance plans.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations65
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207