MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105007923 · doi:10.1061/jtepbs.0000489

Estimations of Vertical Rail Bending Moments from Numerical Track Deflection Measurements Using Wavelet Analysis and Radial Basis Function Neural Networks

2020· article· en· W3105007923 on OpenAlexaff
Ngoan Tien, Mustafa Gül

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Engineering Part A Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Natural ResourcesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeflection (physics)WaveletBending momentTrack (disk drive)Structural engineeringArtificial neural networkComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceOpticsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for estimating rail bending moments from relative vertical track deflection data measured by a train-mounted measurement system is presented in this paper. The novelty of the current study is that complete estimations of rail positive and negative bending moments from track deflection measurements are conducted by using a wavelet multiresolution analysis in conjunction with the radial basis function neural network considering the effects of varying track modulus. The simulation results show that the proposed framework can effectively employ vertical track deflections to estimate both maximum positive and negative bending moments in rails, with the average estimation error being 6.22% (i.e., 2.82 kNm). Moreover, the study confirms the capability of the train-mounted vertical track deflection measurement system (commercially known as MRail) in evaluating the rail bending moments over long distances.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transportation Engineering Part A SystemsSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207