Use of measured accelerations from a passenger rail car to evaluate ride quality and track roughness – A case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing traffic and speeds on passenger rail lines, and a short season for maintenance work, have motivated the industry to find new methods to assess the condition of existing infrastructure and determine where upgrades are required. In this study, acceleration data from the car body and axle boxes of a revenue car over 92 km of a Canadian passenger rail route in Ontario were collected for two purposes: first, to apply weighted filtering method according to ISO 2631-1997 standard as a technique to determine the locations which highly impact the ride quality and to investigate the effect of type of track features and speed on the ride quality; second, a new analytical method called the envelope of acceleration was applied to use the recorded accelerations to evaluate the alignment and surface roughness along the track. Since the alignment and surface roughness values are always positive and are calculated over a specified length (e.g. 9.5 m, 18.9 m, 38 m) an envelope technique was employed which uses spline interpolations over local maxima of the absolute magnitude of accelerations at every separated n samples corresponding to best fit with track roughness. The regression analysis between the envelope of accelerations and alignment and surface roughness presented a meaningful correlation and showed the applied method is a promising analytical technique to indicate rough sections of the track. The limitations to the application of envelope of acceleration are also discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".