MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7027928522

Development of a Condition Assessment Rating System and Prediction Model for Railway Tracks

2024· other· en· W7027928522 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMinority Rights and Languages
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia UniversityTransport Canada
KeywordsTrack (disk drive)Component (thermodynamics)WeightingProcess (computing)Railway systemDomain (mathematical analysis)Rating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has an extensive rail network spanning 45,000 kilometres. The railway system plays a crucial role in serving almost every sector of the Canadian economy. Primarily, it transports freight to and from the U.S. and global markets through coastal ports. However, failures in the railway infrastructure can have severe safety and financial consequences. In 2023, 43.13% of main-track derailments were attributed to track defects, according to the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. These defects, including issues with track geometry and component failures, underline the need for better track condition monitoring and maintenance to prevent derailments. This research aims to address this need by developing a comprehensive rating system for evaluating the condition of ties and rail fastening components and machine learning models to predict future track conditions. While traditional condition assessment ratings have relied on subjective evaluations and considered components separately, this study proposes a Tie and Rail Fastening system that evaluates the condition of ties, tie plates, and spikes. Domain expertise was incorporated through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to prioritize the importance of various defects. The resulting weighting system provides a more detailed and integrated approach compared to existing rating methods, which primarily focus on crack size. Machine learning models, including Random Forest, XGBoost, and Cat Boost, were employed to predict future conditions, such as defect tags, amplitude, and length. These models achieved a 95% accuracy for detecting defect tags and a 75% accuracy when predicting defect tags based on predicted amplitude. On the one hand, the proposed tie and rail fastening rating system can improve the prioritization of future rail maintenance works. On the other hand, the proposed machine learning models can improve the planning of future maintenance by offering better tools for monitoring and predicting track conditions.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicMinority Rights and LanguagesFrench-language works237,207