MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012264872 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.100111

Static and Dynamic Weighing of Rolling Stocks by Mean of a Customized FBG-Sensorized-Patch

2020· article· en· W3012264872 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cristian Vendittozzi, Erwin Ciro, F. Felli, C. Lupi, Francesco Marra, Giovanni Pulci, Alessandro Astri

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structural health monitoring (SHM) of an infrastructure is of fundamental importance for the structure and people safety. Fiber Bragg Grating (FBG) sensors allow to design for each application, a tailored array of quasi-distributed sensors integrated to the infrastructure. To ensure the structural integrity of the railways is crucial to verify that the infrastructures comply with safety requirements to carry out their task. Railways rolling stock must comply with speed limits, the maximum number of wagons, maximum weight limit distributed on each axis of the wagons and the allowed number of trains on specific routes. The identification of the vertical load acting on each wheel is fundamental for the safety of a rolling-stock moving on a railway line. This paper presents the results of a test campaign on sensitive smart patches for static and dynamic weighing of trains. The system aims to generate a gripping system based on the magnetic force of a plastoferrite patch, taking advantage of the peculiarity that the rails are made of ferritic steel. This solution has the benefit of simplifying and speeding up the installation process and enabling a fast and easy removal or change in the configuration of the sensors array on the rail.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

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 head0.202
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207