MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132741112

Fibre optic sensing for thermal stress measurement

2020· article· en· W7132741112 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Merrina Zhang, Alireza Roghani, Neil A. Hoult, Christian Barker, Paul Charbachi

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical fiberStress (linguistics)WeldingTrack (disk drive)Ultimate tensile strengthThermalTemperature measurementThermal expansion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuously welded rail (CWR) is one of the most common railway track constructions. However, large thermal stresses can build up in CWR due to the elimination of expansion gaps leading to rail breaks in cold temperatures and rail buckling in hot temperatures. When rail temperatures are greater than the rail neutral temperature (RNT), compressive stress is induced, while temperatures below RNT induce tensile stress. Technical reviews completed by National Research Council Canada identified a gap in knowledge in quantifying the level of stress being experienced by rails in CWR. Fibre optic sensing was identified as a promising method to measure and monitor long lengths of track in order to better understand thermal stresses in-situ. This research is focused on evaluating the suitability of a select number of fibre optic sensing systems for thermal stress measurement by evaluating these systems, both analysers and optical sensing fibres, within a laboratory setting. This paper provides a brief background on the use of fibre optic sensing before presenting the experimental campaign, including tests conducted on rail segments instrumented with a variety of fibre optic sensors under load as well as when exposed to temperature changes.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207