Analysis of rail corrugation characteristics in the vehicle braking section of metro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To study the evolution characteristics of corrugation in the vehicle braking section of the metro, a three-dimensional wheel–rail transient contact finite element model is established, and the contact stick–slip characteristics and rail wear distribution features are analyzed. The results show that, under the braking condition, the interface has stick–slip motion, indicating that the system is in a state of instability; the longitudinal relative slip is unevenly distributed; the peak position of the initial corrugation has a large longitudinal relative slip; and the transverse relative slip in the initial corrugation area is significantly larger than that in other areas, indicating that the initial corrugation will continue to develop and have a remarkable transverse wear trend. Under the nonbraking condition, there is no stick–slip motion at the interface, and the longitudinal and transverse relative slip values are less than the corresponding results under the braking condition. The cause of corrugation in the vehicle braking section is the wheel–rail unstable stick–slip motion triggered by the vehicle braking, and the fixed operating mode of the train provides the wavelength-fixing condition for the development of the initial corrugation, which leads to its continuous deterioration.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".