MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387025865 · doi:10.1002/cepa.2741

Case study: use of SHM to support bridge assessment, maintenance and operation

2023· article· en· W4387025865 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrea Paciacconi, Thomas Richli

Bibliographic record

Venuece/papers · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Structural health monitoringCorrosionForensic engineeringCorrosion monitoringKey (lock)EngineeringConstruction engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceCivil engineeringComputer securityElectrical engineeringBusinessMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The assessment of infrastructure conditions is at present a topic of great interest and importance, as well as great challenge. This paper presents a case study of the Samuel De Champlain Bridge (Montreal, QB, Canada), an outstanding stay cable bridge equipped with a comprehensive monitoring system (SHM). Among other SHM features, particular attention was paid to implementation of a strategic corrosion monitoring system. This paper intends to describe the concept design, implementation and data interpretation. Here corrosion sensors have been embedded during construction stage to monitor long term evolution of key electro‐chemical parameters for controlling deterioration of materials. Furthermore, these sensors measure stray current interference generated from the rail system that can cause corrosion. In both cases, abnormal values would warn the owner of the associated increased risk of corrosion. This gives them the possibility to take corrective measures to protect the structure before corrosion becomes a serious threat.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuece/papersSame topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207