ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Fusing Expert Knowledge with Monitoring Data for Condition Assessment of Railway Welds.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research on multi-stage on-board detection algorithm of track defects of high-speed railway based on the influence mechanism of track defects.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Freight Wagon Digitalization for Condition Monitoring and Advanced Operation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Monitoring information can facilitate the condition assessment of railway infrastructure, via delivery of data that is informative on condition. A primary instance of such data is found in Axle Box Accelerations (ABAs), which track the dynamic vehicle/track interaction. Such sensors have been installed on specialized monitoring trains, as well as on in-service On-Board Monitoring (OBM) vehicles across Europe, enabling a continuous assessment of railway track condition. However, ABA measurements come with uncertainties that stem from noise corrupt data and the non-linear rail-wheel contact dynamics, as well as variations in environmental and operational conditions. These uncertainties pose a challenge for the condition assessment of rail welds through existing assessment tools. In this work, we use expert feedback as a complementary information source, which allows the narrowing down of these uncertainties, and, ultimately, refines assessment. Over the past year, with the support of the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB), we have assembled a database of expert evaluations on the condition of rail weld samples that have been diagnosed as critical via ABA monitoring. In this work, we fuse features derived from the ABA data with expert feedback, in order to refine defection of faulty (defect) welds. Three models are employed to this end; Binary Classification and Random Forest (RF) models, as well as a Bayesian Logistic Regression (BLR) scheme. The RF and BLR models proved superior to the Binary Classification model, while the BLR model further delivered a probability of prediction, quantifying the confidence we might attribute to the assigned labels. We explain that the classification task necessarily suffers high uncertainty, which is a result of faulty ground truth labels, and explain the value of continuously tracking the weld condition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.