MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387380822 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2022-0107

Use of axle load spectra (ALS) for estimating calibration drift in weigh-in-motion (WIM) systems

2023· article· en· W4387380822 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransport Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeigh in motionAxleTruckCalibrationAxle loadComputer scienceInfluence lineEngineeringStructural engineeringStatisticsAutomotive engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The road agencies collect and submit weigh-in-motion (WIM) data to the Federal Highway Administration as part of their traffic monitoring program. Therefore, the WIM data should be precise and accurate. One way to evaluate WIM measurement errors is by using the test truck data collected immediately before and after equipment calibration. The limitation of this approach is that the data represent a snapshot in time and may not represent a long-term WIM site performance. This paper presents an approach for estimating WIM system accuracy based on axle load spectra attributes (normalized axle load spectra (NALS) shape factors). This alternative approach allows for characterizing temporal changes in WIM data consistency. The WIM error data collected before and after calibration were related to Class 9 NALS shape factors in the proposed methodology. This paper aims to determine WIM system errors based on axle loading without physically performing WIM equipment performance validation using test trucks. The presented methodology can be used to estimate systematic errors (drift) in the WIM system at any point in time after the equipment calibration. This approach can help highway agencies select optimum timings for routine maintenance and calibration of WIM equipment without compromising its accuracy. The results show that the WIM accuracy for the single axle (SA) and tandem axle (TA) can be estimated with SA and TA NALS shape factors with an acceptable degree of error for bending plate to quartz piezo sensors. Examples are included to demonstrate the application and significance of the developed models.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.174 · 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