A Digital Twin of Bridges for Structural Health Monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bridges are critical infrastructure systems connecting different regions and providing widespread social and economic benefits. It is therefore essential that they are designed, constructed and maintained properly to adapt to changing conditions of use and climate-driven events. With the rapid development in capability of collecting bridge monitoring data, a data challenge emerges due to insufficient capability in managing, processing and interpreting large monitoring datasets to extract useful information which is of practical value to the industry. One emerging area of research which focuses on addressing this challenge is the creation of ‘digital twins’ for bridges. A digital twin serves as a virtual representation of the physical infrastructure (i.e. the physical twin), which can be updated in near real time as new data is collected, provide feedback into the physical twin and perform ‘what-if’ scenarios for assessing asset risks and predicting asset performance. This paper presents and broadly discusses two years of exploratory study towards creating a digital twin of bridges for structural health monitoring purposes. In particular, it has involved an interdisciplinary collaboration between civil engineers at the Cambridge Centre for Smart Infrastructure and Construction (CSIC) and statisticians at the Alan Turing Institute (ATI), using two monitored railway bridges in Staffordshire, UK as a case study. Four areas of research were investigated: (i) real-time data management using BIM, (ii) physics-based approaches, (iii) data-driven approaches, and (iv) data-centric engineering approaches (i.e. synthesis of physics-based and datadriven approaches). A framework for creating a digital twin of bridges, particularly for structural health monitoring purposes, is proposed and briefly discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".