Tri-axial ground-borne vibration measurements during rail pass-bys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ground-borne vibrations from rail pass-bys, transmitted from train wheels rolling on the rails, have the potential to cause various adverse effects at nearby receptors, such as annoyance and re-radiated noise. To assess the impact of rail pass-bys, surface-level vibration can be characterized in three components: one vertical and two horizontal directions. Prior experience, best-practice guidelines from the Federal Transit Administration Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, and theory of propagation of Rayleigh surface waves indicate that the vertical component dominates the horizontal components, such that vibrations from rail pass-bys can be adequately characterized by the vertical component only. This purpose of this study is to assess the sufficiency of characterizing the impact of ground-borne vibrations caused by rail pass-bys based solely in the vertical direction. Tri-axial vibration measurements were conducted for freight and passenger trains in Ontario, Canada, using a multi-channel signal analyzer for simultaneous measurement of multiple-axis vibration levels. The measured levels were then examined across the three components.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".