MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387458074 · doi:10.3390/s23198308

Pile Damage Detection Using Machine Learning with the Multipoint Traveling Wave Decomposition Method

2023· article· en· W4387458074 on OpenAlexaff
Juntao Wu, M. Hesham El Naggar, Kuihua Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learningMultilayer perceptronPilePerceptronExtreme learning machineArtificial neural networkSignal processingBoosting (machine learning)Pattern recognition (psychology)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The in-hole multipoint traveling wave decomposition (MPTWD) method is developed for detecting and characterizing the damage of cast in situ reinforced concrete (RC) piles. Compared with the results of MPTWD, the results of the in-hole MPTWD reconstruction technique are found ideal for evaluating the lower-part pile integrity and are further utilized to establish a data-driven machine-learning framework to detect and quantify the degree of damage. Considering the relatively small number of field test samples of the in-hole MPTWD method at this stage, an analytical solution is employed to generate sufficient samples to verify the feasibility and optimize the performance of the machine learning modeling framework. Two types of features extracted by the distributed sampling and statistical and signal processing techniques are applied to three machine-learning classifiers, i.e., logistic regression (LR), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and multilayer perceptron (MLP). The performance of the data-driven machine-learning framework is then evaluated through a specific case study. The results demonstrate that all three classifiers perform better when employing the statistical and signal processing techniques, and the total of 24 extracted features are sufficient for the machine-learning algorithms.

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 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207