MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807741033 · doi:10.7939/r3t14tx5m

Investigation and Analysis of the New Walterdale Bridge to Develop a Structural Health Monitoring System

2015· article· en· W2807741033 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aimee De Laurentiis

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Structural health monitoringComputer scienceEngineeringMedicineStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural Health Monitoring (SHM), a technique of applying sensors to a structure to monitor for damage, is becoming a good preventative and management application to use on new and existing infrastructure, such as bridges, in order to effectively monitor and evaluate their performance under various loading scenarios. The application of SHM can be a cost-effective solution, as it can decrease the cost of maintenance by allowing engineers to confirm their design assumptions and make well informed decisions on the extent of damage present. In order to do so, however, it is necessary to understand the actual behaviour of the structure and how the behaviour can best be measured. In Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, the century-old Walterdale Bridge has reached the end of its service life and is being replaced by a new bridge. The new Walterdale Bridge is a thrust-arch bridge that has been designed to meet the functional and aesthetic needs of users. It will be the first of its kind in Edmonton. In this project, a preliminary finite element (FE) model of the new bridge was modified and analyzed under design and predicted loading. A sensor layout was then developed that incorporates 199 sensors. Preliminary investigation into the accelerometer layout plan was conducted using the Complex Mode Indicator Function (CMIF) modal identification algorithm. This investigation found that global damage, such as a change in boundary conditions, can be detected more easily than local damage simulations, which would be expected using global measurement techniques. The ability to detect local damage was dependent on the severity of damage present and the locations of the sensors on the structure. As this damage detection analysis is preliminary, the ability to detect damage may change in further studies that incorporate other algorithms and measurement types.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207