MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409604893 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-320

Computational and Risk Assessment Modeling of Bridge Inspection Data Enabled by Sensors and Monitoring Systems

2025· article· en· W4409604893 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Computer scienceRisk assessmentStructural health monitoringReliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringEngineeringComputer securityBusinessMedicineElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aiming at the bridge monitoring system, some of the monitoring data are abnormal due to equipment failure and environmental impacts.In this paper, the time-frequency domain convolutional neural network method is applied to the calculation of monitoring data and the risk assessment of bridge structure.The data collected by the acceleration sensor is firstly sliced and sampled and visualized.Then wavelet analysis is used to preprocess the cluttered data, and Wigner-Ville distribution and Fast Fourier Transform are introduced to extract time-frequency features from the collected data.A convolutional neural network is proposed and the network is trained on dual channel images fusing time and frequency domain images.By analyzing the spectrogram and and time-frequency diagram of the bridge monitoring data, the method of this paper classifies the bridge health condition into three kinds: no disease, slight disease and disease, which can accurately determine the health condition of different bridges, and the assessment accuracy of the risk assessment model based on the fusion of time-frequency domain information reaches 97.78%, which indicates that the high efficiency and feasibility of the bridge inspection data computation and the risk assessment model in this paper can meet the actual engineering construction needs of bridge inspection.

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)0.001
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 score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207