MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902619956 · doi:10.4018/ijsds.2019010103

Modelling the Deterioration of Bridge Decks Based on Semi-Markov Decision Process

2018· article· en· W2902619956 on OpenAlexaff
Eslam Mohammed Abdelkader, Tarek Zayed, Mohamed Marzouk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeibull distributionLatin hypercube samplingMarkov chainGoodness of fitStatisticsStatisticMathematicsComputer scienceMean squared errorMarkov modelMonte Carlo method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deterioration models represent a very important pillar for the effective use of bridge management systems (BMS's). This article presents a probabilistic time-based model that predicts the condition ratings of the concrete bridge decks along their service life. The deterioration process of the concrete bridge decks is modeled using a semi-Markov decision process. The sojourn time of each condition state is fitted to a certain probability distribution based on some goodness of fit tests. The parameters of the probability density functions are obtained using maximum likelihood estimation. The cumulative density functions are defined based on Latin hypercube sampling. Finally, a comparison is conducted between the Markov Chain, semi-Markov chain, Weibull and gamma distributions to select the most accurate prediction model. Results indicate that the semi-Markov model outperformed the other models in terms of three performance indicators are: root-mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), chi-squared statistic (x2).

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Strategic Decision SciencesSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207