比较用于预测 CRTS II 板式轨道过渡段温度的各种神经网络方法

Rui Zhou, Mingfeng He, Hongbin Xu, Hongyao Lu, Hanlin Liu, Jie Qi
{"title":"比较用于预测 CRTS II 板式轨道过渡段温度的各种神经网络方法","authors":"Rui Zhou, Mingfeng He, Hongbin Xu, Hongyao Lu, Hanlin Liu, Jie Qi","doi":"10.1093/iti/liae004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Based on the meteorological measuring data, the prediction of the temperature field is worthy of thermal performance evaluation of CRTS II slab tracks in bridge-subgrade transition sections. To find the best temperature prediction method, this present study shows a comparison of internal temperature predictions in CRTS II slab track by using three typical neural network methods (ANN, CNN, LSTM) subjected to different meteorological factors. Firstly, the distribution characteristics of four meteorological factors (e.g. ambient temperature, solar radiation, wind speed, and humidity) and internal temperature for the CRTS II slab track on three different foundations are analyzed. Moreover, temperature prediction effects of track slab and base plate on three foundations under five meteorological testing cases are compared by using three neural network models, respectively. The results show that the ambient temperature ranging from 15°C and 25°C accounts for about 7% and the solar radiation during daytime mainly ranges from 100 W/m2 to 1100 W/m2. The solar radiation has more effect on the temperature gradients of the CRTS II slab track on bridge and transition zone than that of the ambient temperature, and Case 5 with five different input variables has the best prediction accuracy for three predict models among five testing cases. Although the LSTM model has the best prediction accuracy among the three prediction models with R2 values of about 0.85, it costs the longest calculation time of about 180 s. In addition, the track slab on bridge has the worst prediction accuracy for the ANN and CNN models among the three foundations with RMSE values of 4.5 and 2.5 for Case 2, and the base plate on transition zone has the best prediction accuracy both for the CNN and LSTM models among the three foundations with RMSE values of 3 for Case 5.","PeriodicalId":479889,"journal":{"name":"Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure","volume":"16 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing various neural network methods for temperature prediction of CRTS II slab track on transition sections\",\"authors\":\"Rui Zhou, Mingfeng He, Hongbin Xu, Hongyao Lu, Hanlin Liu, Jie Qi\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/iti/liae004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Based on the meteorological measuring data, the prediction of the temperature field is worthy of thermal performance evaluation of CRTS II slab tracks in bridge-subgrade transition sections. To find the best temperature prediction method, this present study shows a comparison of internal temperature predictions in CRTS II slab track by using three typical neural network methods (ANN, CNN, LSTM) subjected to different meteorological factors. Firstly, the distribution characteristics of four meteorological factors (e.g. ambient temperature, solar radiation, wind speed, and humidity) and internal temperature for the CRTS II slab track on three different foundations are analyzed. Moreover, temperature prediction effects of track slab and base plate on three foundations under five meteorological testing cases are compared by using three neural network models, respectively. The results show that the ambient temperature ranging from 15°C and 25°C accounts for about 7% and the solar radiation during daytime mainly ranges from 100 W/m2 to 1100 W/m2. The solar radiation has more effect on the temperature gradients of the CRTS II slab track on bridge and transition zone than that of the ambient temperature, and Case 5 with five different input variables has the best prediction accuracy for three predict models among five testing cases. Although the LSTM model has the best prediction accuracy among the three prediction models with R2 values of about 0.85, it costs the longest calculation time of about 180 s. In addition, the track slab on bridge has the worst prediction accuracy for the ANN and CNN models among the three foundations with RMSE values of 4.5 and 2.5 for Case 2, and the base plate on transition zone has the best prediction accuracy both for the CNN and LSTM models among the three foundations with RMSE values of 3 for Case 5.\",\"PeriodicalId\":479889,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure\",\"volume\":\"16 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/iti/liae004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/iti/liae004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于气象测量数据,温度场的预测对桥梁-路基过渡段 CRTS II 板式轨道的热性能评估具有重要价值。为了找到最佳的温度预测方法,本研究采用三种典型的神经网络方法(ANN、CNN、LSTM)对不同气象因素下 CRTS II 板式轨道的内部温度进行了预测比较。首先,分析了四种气象因素(如环境温度、太阳辐射、风速和湿度)与三种不同地基上 CRTS II 板式轨道内部温度的分布特征。此外,还利用三种神经网络模型分别比较了三种地基上的轨道板和底板在五种气象测试情况下的温度预测效果。结果表明,15°C 至 25°C 的环境温度约占 7%,白天的太阳辐射主要在 100 W/m2 至 1100 W/m2 之间。与环境温度相比,太阳辐射对 CRTS II 桥上板轨和过渡区温度梯度的影响更大,在 5 个测试案例中,案例 5(包含 5 个不同输入变量)对 3 个预测模型的预测精度最高。虽然 LSTM 模型在三个预测模型中预测精度最高,R2 值约为 0.85,但其计算时间最长,约为 180 秒。此外,在三个地基中,桥上轨道板的 ANN 和 CNN 模型预测精度最差,案例 2 的 RMSE 值分别为 4.5 和 2.5;在三个地基中,过渡区底板的 CNN 和 LSTM 模型预测精度最高,案例 5 的 RMSE 值均为 3。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing various neural network methods for temperature prediction of CRTS II slab track on transition sections
Based on the meteorological measuring data, the prediction of the temperature field is worthy of thermal performance evaluation of CRTS II slab tracks in bridge-subgrade transition sections. To find the best temperature prediction method, this present study shows a comparison of internal temperature predictions in CRTS II slab track by using three typical neural network methods (ANN, CNN, LSTM) subjected to different meteorological factors. Firstly, the distribution characteristics of four meteorological factors (e.g. ambient temperature, solar radiation, wind speed, and humidity) and internal temperature for the CRTS II slab track on three different foundations are analyzed. Moreover, temperature prediction effects of track slab and base plate on three foundations under five meteorological testing cases are compared by using three neural network models, respectively. The results show that the ambient temperature ranging from 15°C and 25°C accounts for about 7% and the solar radiation during daytime mainly ranges from 100 W/m2 to 1100 W/m2. The solar radiation has more effect on the temperature gradients of the CRTS II slab track on bridge and transition zone than that of the ambient temperature, and Case 5 with five different input variables has the best prediction accuracy for three predict models among five testing cases. Although the LSTM model has the best prediction accuracy among the three prediction models with R2 values of about 0.85, it costs the longest calculation time of about 180 s. In addition, the track slab on bridge has the worst prediction accuracy for the ANN and CNN models among the three foundations with RMSE values of 4.5 and 2.5 for Case 2, and the base plate on transition zone has the best prediction accuracy both for the CNN and LSTM models among the three foundations with RMSE values of 3 for Case 5.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信