MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200162221 · doi:10.3390/pr10010036

Hybrid Grey Wolf Optimization-Based Gaussian Process Regression Model for Simulating Deterioration Behavior of Highway Tunnel Components

2021· article· en· W4200162221 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueProcesses · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkKrigingEngineeringSupport vector machineProcess (computing)Ground-penetrating radarPerformance predictionSlabPredictive modellingComponent (thermodynamics)Gaussian processStatistical modelComputer scienceMachine learningGaussianStructural engineeringSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Highway tunnels are one of the paramount infrastructure systems that affect the welfare of communities. They are vulnerable to higher limits of deterioration, yet there are limited available funds for maintenance and rehabilitation. This state of circumstances entails the development of a deterioration model to forecast the performance condition behavior of critical tunnel elements. Accordingly, this research paper proposes an integrated deterioration prediction model for five highway tunnel elements, namely, cast-in-place tunnel liners, concrete interior walls, concrete portal, concrete ceiling slab, and concrete slab on grade. The developed deterioration model is envisioned in two fundamental components, which are model calibration and model assessment. In the first component, an integrated model of Gaussian process regression and a grey wolf optimization algorithm (GWO-GPR) is introduced for deterioration behavior prediction of highway tunnel elements. In this regard, the grey wolf optimizer is exploited to improve the prediction accuracies of the Gaussian process through optimal estimation of its hyper parameters and to automatically interpret the significant deterioration factors. The second component involves three tiers of performance evaluation comparison, statistical significance comparisons, and consolidated ranking to assess the prediction accuracies of the developed GWO-GPR model. In this regard, the developed model is validated against six widely acknowledged machine learning models, which are back-propagation artificial neural network, Elman neural network, cascade forward neural network, generalized regression neural network, support vector machines, and regression tree. Results demonstrate that the developed GWO-GPR model significantly outperformed other deterioration prediction models in the five tunnel elements. In cast-in-place tunnel liners it accomplished a mean absolute percentage error, mean absolute error, root mean square percentage error, root relative squared error, and relative absolute error of 1.65%, 0.018, 0.21%, 0.018, and 0.147, respectively. In this context, it was inferred that the developed GWO-GPR model managed to reduce the prediction errors of the back-propagation artificial neural network, Elman neural network, and support vector machines by 84.71%, 76.91%, and 69.6%, respectively. It can be concluded that the developed deterioration model can assist transportation agencies in creating timely and cost-efficient maintenance schedules of highway tunnels.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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