MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153543505 · doi:10.1080/13287982.2021.1908710

A Data-Driven Damage Assessment Tool for Truss-Type Railroad Bridges Using Train Induced Strain Time-History Response

2021· article· en· W3153543505 on OpenAlexaff
Riasat Azim

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Structural Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrussStructural engineeringBridge (graph theory)Truss bridgeParametric statisticsFinite element methodEngineeringNoise (video)Strain (injury)Computer scienceMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a non-parametric damage detection method for truss-type railroad bridges is presented. The method uses operational strain time-history responses to detect damage in truss elements, and change in support behaviour. Dynamic strain time-history responses obtained under baseline and unknown-state bridge conditions are used to compute the magnitudes of differences in strain values between two successive time-steps. A new damage-sensitive feature (DSF) is proposed as the change in percentage of the square root of the sum of squared values of these magnitudes. After establishing a threshold DSF based on the baseline bridge, further structural change or damage in the bridge could be detected and located by observing the values of the DSFs. The validity of the method is investigated through finite element analysis of a steel-truss railway bridge. It is demonstrated that the proposed method yields promising results for identifying, locating, and relatively assessing the damage, and could be useful even when different operational conditions (i.e. different train speeds and loads) and measurement noise influence the strain data. Therefore, the proposed method has the potential to assist in developing effective maintenance strategies for railway bridges.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Structural EngineeringSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207