MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022381116 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2018-0773

A gradient based optimization procedure for finding axle weights in probabilistic bridge weigh-in-motion method

2020· article· en· W3022381116 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matheus Silva Gonçalves, Felipe Carraro, Rafael Holdorf Lopez

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsAxleProbabilistic logicWeigh in motionBridge (graph theory)GridComputer scienceAlgorithmComputational complexity theoryMathematical optimizationStructural engineeringEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bridge weigh-in-motion (BWIM) consists of the use of sensors on bridges to assess the loads of passing vehicles. Probabilistic bridge weigh-in-motion (pBWIM) is an approach for solving the inverse problem of finding vehicle axle weights based on deformation information. The pBWIM approach uses a probabilistic influence line and seeks the most probable axle weights, given in situ measurements. To compute such weights, the original pBWIM employed a grid search, which may lead to computational complexity, especially when applied to vehicles with high number of axles. Hence, this note presents an improved version of pBWIM, modifying the manner in which the most probable weights are sought. Here, a gradient based optimization procedure is proposed for replacing the computationally expensive grid-search of the original algorithm. The required gradients are fully derived and validated in numerical examples. The proposed modification is shown to highly decrease the computational complexity of the problem.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207