MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036018707 · doi:10.3390/vibration3020012

Continuous Evaluation of Track Modulus from a Moving Railcar Using ANN-Based Techniques

2020· article· en· W3036018707 on OpenAlexaff
T. Ngoan, Mustafa Gül, Saeideh Fallah Nafari

Bibliographic record

VenueVibration · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrack (disk drive)Deflection (physics)StiffnessArtificial neural networkModulusFinite element methodStructural engineeringComputer scienceSimulationAlgorithmEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceOpticsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Track foundation stiffness (also referred as the track modulus) is one of the main parameters that affect the track performance, and thus, quantifying its magnitudes and variations along the track is widely accepted as a method for evaluating the track condition. In recent decades, the train-mounted vertical track deflection measurement system developed at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln (known as the MRail system) appears as a promising tool to assess track structures over long distances. Numerical methods with different levels of complexity have been proposed to simulate the MRail deflection measurements. These simulations facilitated the investigation and quantification of the relationship between the vertical deflections and the track modulus. In our previous study, finite element models (FEMs) with a stochastically varying track modulus were used for the simulation of the deflection measurements, and the relationships between the statistical properties of the track modulus and deflections were quantified over different track section lengths using curve-fitting approaches. The shortcoming is that decreasing the track section length resulted in a lower accuracy of estimations. In this study, the datasets from the same FEMs are used for the investigations, and the relationship between the measured deflection and track modulus averages and standard deviations are quantified using artificial neural networks (ANNs). Different approaches available for training the ANNs using FEM datasets are discussed. It is shown that the estimation accuracy can be significantly increased by using ANNs, especially when the estimations of track modulus and its variations are required over short track section lengths, ANNs result in more accurate estimations compared to the use of equations from curve-fitting approaches. Results also show that ANNs are effective for the estimations of track modulus even when the noisy datasets are used for training the ANNs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVibrationSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207