MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597522984 · doi:10.1364/ao.56.002714

Standard-wheel-based field calibration method for railway wheelset diameter online measuring system

2017· article· en· W2597522984 on OpenAlexaff
Yuejian Chen, Zongyi Xing, Yifan Li, Zhi Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesGuangzhou Science and Technology Program key projectsChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsCalibrationComputer scienceCalipersSolverNonlinear programmingDisplacement (psychology)Field (mathematics)ResidualNonlinear systemOpticsAlgorithmPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser displacement sensor (LDS)-based online measuring of the wheel diameter has been widely adopted in engineering for advantages such as noncontact, high efficiency, and high precision. For almost all these online measuring systems, calibration is certainly needed in order to obtain the extrinsic parameters of sensors. A field-based easy-to-operate, economical, and efficient calibration method is proposed for an LDS-based wheel diameter online measuring system. Only one standard wheelset is used to build the 3D calibration target that is also the measurement target of the system. The extrinsic parameters for each LDS are obtained through minimizing the residual summation of squares. A multistart framework combining the generation of certain numbers of uniformly distributed starting points and a nonlinear programming solver is adopted to solve the minimizing function to obtain the global optimizer. Factors include the number of standard wheelset placement and sensor noises that will result in calibration error are analyzed. Field experiments are carried out, and the correctness of the calibration method is verified through comparisons with manual caliper-measuring results.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.729

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207