MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195130056 · doi:10.1177/09544097211041459

Use of measured accelerations from a passenger rail car to evaluate ride quality and track roughness – A case study

2021· article· en· W3195130056 on OpenAlex
Parisa Haji Abdulrazagh, Michael T. Hendry, Mustafa Gül, Alireza Roghani, Elton Toma

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part F Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaTransport Canada
KeywordsEnvelope (radar)AccelerationRide qualitySurface finishTrack (disk drive)Surface roughnessComputer scienceAxle loadStructural engineeringAutomotive engineeringAxleEngineeringSimulationMechanical engineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.210 · 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