MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592952515 · doi:10.1002/atr.1445

Train movement simulation by element increment method

2016· article· en· W2592952515 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gaowei Xu, Feng Li, Jiancheng Long, Ding Han

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersState Key Laboratory of Rail Traffic Control and SafetyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTraction (geology)Process (computing)Computer scienceCurve fittingDiscrete element methodSimulationPolynomialMovement (music)EngineeringAlgorithmMechanical engineeringMathematicsMechanicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The article presents an element increment method that is developed by current time increment method of train traction calculation. A railway route was divided, breaking it down into elements of different lengths. A whole train movement simulation curve ( v – t curve and v – S curve) was formed by splitting the joints of each of the elements' individual simulation curves. During this process, the train velocity variance was calculated by time increment method with assistance of polynomial fitting technology. Additionally, a step‐by‐step method with iteration was used to combine each element and makes the whole simulation curve continuous. Meanwhile, the energy‐saving issue was also taken into account to optimize the simulation curve. This article gives more details about the modeling by providing an example of a railway route based on moving block control. The element increment method is a more effective way to calculate train traction of high‐speed railway, and it is an alternative method to train movement simulation for aiding macroscopic railway transportation planning. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicRailway Systems and Energy EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207