MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116714464 · doi:10.11159/ijci.2025.023

Estimation of Friction Coefficient of Movable Bearings based on Thermal Displacement

2025· article· W7116714464 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yūichi Itō, Kouichi Takeya, Eiichi Sasaki

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Civil Infrastructure · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisplacement (psychology)ThermalBearing (navigation)Friction coefficientTemperature measurement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Movable bearings are expected to respond to bridge expansion and contraction due to temperature changes and train loads.However, due to the friction within a bearing, actual bearing movement tends to be smaller than theoretical prediction.This discrepancy between actual situation and theoretical evaluation can suggest that girder expansion or contraction is constrained, thereby causing stresses and frictional reaction forces at the bearing seat.Although bearing friction is expected to increase with age, there is no standardized method for evaluating the friction coefficient, making it unclear when preventive maintenance actions should be implemented.This study aims to estimate the friction coefficient of bearings in actual bridges using finite element method (FEM) analysis and field measurements.The measurements have revealed a characteristic behavior whereby the bearings initially stick and then slip.This bearing behavior was then reproduced using numerical simulation, demonstrating the feasibility of estimating the friction coefficient of movable bearings under inservice 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 venueInternational Journal of Civil InfrastructureSame topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207