MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774178916 · doi:10.12783/shm2017/13964

Transfer Matrices-based Output-only Statistical Damage Localization and Quantification of a Frame Structure

2017· article· en· W2774178916 on OpenAlexaff
M. Bhuyan, Saeid Allahdadian, Michael Döhler, Yann Lecieux, Laurent Mevel, Franck Schoefs, Carlos E. Ventura

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrame (networking)Finite element methodStructural engineeringStiffnessComputer scienceSensitivity (control systems)VibrationTransfer matrixMatrix (chemical analysis)Stiffness matrixEngineeringPhysicsMaterials scienceComputer visionAcousticsElectronic engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Damage localization in civil or mechanical structures is a subject of active development and research. In this paper, vibration measurements and a finite element model are used to locate loss of stiffness in a steel frame structure at the University of British Columbia. Damage localization is not very well developed so far and few methods show promising properties in practice. Among them, the Stochastic Dynamic Damage Locating Vector (SDDLV) approach has interesting capabilities. In this paper, it is compared to a sensitivity based approach developed by the authors. Both approaches have in common to be built on the estimated transfer matrix difference between reference and damaged states. Both methods are tested for localization and quantification on the Yellow Frame structure at the University of British Columbia

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207