MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetic Algorithm-Markovian Model for Predictive Bridge Asset Management

2021· article· en· W3170961210 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Yosri, Yasser Elleathy, Sonia Hassini, Wael El‐Dakhakhni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bridge Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Markov chainNonlinear systemComputer scienceMarkov processMathematical optimizationGenetic algorithmAsset (computer security)Set (abstract data type)Hidden Markov modelCalibrationMarkov modelAlgorithmMathematicsMachine learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid or unexpected bridge deterioration can lead to partial collapse, which can subsequently hinder transportation activities and result in economic and human losses. Heavily adopted by the research community, Markov chain-based deterioration models assume that bridge conditions exhibit stationary transitions over time. This assumption requires a significantly large, and often difficult to obtain, number of historical records. As such, Markov chain-based deterioration models have been developed within classical nonlinear optimization frameworks that might result in local optimal solutions. Therefore, to enhance the model capability to simulate the temporal state transition, this study develops a Markovian-based deterioration model embedded within a genetic algorithm (GA) framework—a class of evolutionary computing techniques, to overcome local optimality issues. To demonstrate its applicability, the developed model was applied to a relevant data set of previously rehabilitated and unrehabilitated concrete and steel bridges. The developed GA-Markovian model was able to replicate the actual state probabilities for the unrehabilitated bridges within both the calibration and validation periods. The model performance was slightly lower for the previously rehabilitated bridges due to the inherited nonstationary transition. The model developed in the present study can be used to guide effective rehabilitation and replacement strategies, prioritize available resources, and devise data-driven predictive bridge asset management policies and standards.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bridge EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207