MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802049951 · doi:10.1155/2018/6340504

Rail Degradation Prediction Models for Tram System: Melbourne Case Study

2018· article· en· W2802049951 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amir Falamarzi, Sara Moridpour, Majidreza Nazem, Reyhaneh Hesami

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrack (disk drive)Regression analysisMode (computer interface)EngineeringDegradation (telecommunications)AccelerationTransport engineeringSimulationComputer scienceStatisticsMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tram is classified as a light rail mode of transportation. Tram tracks experience high acceleration and deceleration forces of locomotives and wagons within their service life and also share their route with other vehicles. This results in higher rates of degradation in tram tracks compared to the degradation rate in heavy rail tracks. In this research, gauge deviation is employed as a representative of track geometry irregularities for the predication of the tram track degradation. Data sets used in this research were sourced from Melbourne’s tram system. For model development, the data of approximately 250 km of tram tracks are used. Two different models including a regression model and an Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) model have been applied for predicting tram track gauge deviation. According to the results, the performances of the regression models are similar to the ANN models. The determination coefficients of the developed models are above 0.7.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations28
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207