MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912946025 · doi:10.1080/15732479.2018.1562479

Condition evaluation of suspension bridges for maintenance, repair and rehabilitation: a comprehensive framework

2019· article· en· W2912946025 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStructure and Infrastructure Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsOntario Power GenerationUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsVariable (mathematics)Analytic hierarchy processReliability engineeringBridge (graph theory)Computer scienceEngineeringOperations researchMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To indicate health status of bridges and help stakeholders make decision on maintenance, a comprehensive framework has been proposed to evaluate structural efficiency of suspension bridges using analytic hierarchy process. First, the analytical hierarchy model (i.e. hierarchical network together with data aggregation algorithms) has been constructed using multi-source data, including visual inspection, non-destructive testing and structural health monitoring information. Age-dependent variable weight theory is developed to account for the service history of elements ensuring the alignment of variation trend of index weights with the objective law in bridge maintenance and management activities. To overcome the limitations of factor-based variable weight model for weight adjustment, the factor- and age-based variable weight model has been adopted for data aggregation. Finally, four cases are used to test the effectiveness of the three models (i.e. constant weight model, factor-based variable weight model and factor- and age-based variable weight model). By comparing the performance of the three models, the recommended maintenance strategy derived from factor- and age-based variable weight model aligns more with the actual strategy than the other two. The factor- and age-based variable weight model outperforms both the factor-based variable weight model and constant weight model in helping bridge owners make maintenance decisions.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.224 · 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