MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293764601 · doi:10.1061/9780784484371.004

Use of Critical Temperature Differential in Railroad Engineering

2022· article· en· W4293764601 on OpenAlexaff
Nazmul Hasan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Transportation and Development 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Structural Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsSNC-Lavalin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrack (disk drive)Structural engineeringBallastTrack geometryConsolidation (business)Differential (mechanical device)Range (aeronautics)Computer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringAerospace engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study the potential use of the critical temperature differential for buckling, ΔTC, of a track alone and in conjunction with a rail neutral temperature, RNT, was explored. A brief review on ΔTC was done for selecting an appropriate value of it. The value of ΔTC was used to classify a track and to determine the longitudinal test load of a bonded joint, allowable thermal stress, and RNT range for natural distressing of a continuously welded rail track. Formulas were derived in terms of ΔTC and RNT to determine cold and hot weather patrolling temperatures, the limiting temperature of tamping, and the ballasting of a skeleton track. An operational load was recommended for the consolidation of concrete and wood tie tracks, respectively, before opening for revenue traffic. The aforementioned formulas would be useful for the construction and maintenance of a track for any track condition, and geometry at any region.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Transportation and Development 2022Same topicEngineering Structural Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207