ArticleScientific reports2025
Spatiotemporal dependency data imputation for long-term health monitoring of concrete arch bridges.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The structural health monitoring of bridge infrastructures is imperative for ensuring their uninterrupted functionality and mitigating potential hazards. Nevertheless, challenges arise Due to missing data and intricate latent dynamics embedded in field sensing measurements, complicating the forecasting efforts. Addressing these challenges, this paper introduces a pioneering CCF-BiGRU model designed for the imputation of missing data in bridge strain monitoring. This model harnesses the spatial correlations among sensor data, analyzed through cross-correlation algorithms, combined with the predictive capabilities of the BiGRU neural network. By conducting experiments with 5%-20% missing completely at random data in authentic bridge monitoring contexts, the study substantiates the efficacy of this approach. The CCF-BiGRU model surpasses its counterparts— BiGRU, BiLSTM, GRU, and LSTM models—in several critical performance metrics (root mean square error, correlation coefficient, and relative accuracy). Notably, its performance metrics remain consistent even as the proportion of missing data escalates. Specifically, in scenarios with 5% to 10% data omission, the CCF-BiGRU model consistently exhibits a uniform error distribution in MASE evaluations, highlighting its robustness. Although CCF-BiLSTM model shows similar interpolation performance, its computational cost is much higher. These compelling results validate the efficiency and reliability of the CCF-BiGRU method, a data-driven solution that not only shows promise but also excels in computational efficiency. It adeptly predicts and fills gaps in bridge strain monitoring data, thereby ensuring precise evaluations of bridge health.
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.