MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1573836230 · doi:10.1016/0952-5807(95)00069-0

10.1016/0952-5807(95)00069-0

2000· article· en· W1573836230 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrussSimulated annealingModular designTopology (electrical circuits)Topology optimizationHeuristicMathematical optimizationComputer scienceStructural engineeringAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringFinite element methodCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper an extended study of the combinatorial optimization technique known as simulated annealing (SA) applied to the minimum weight design of plane trusses subject to a multiple loading case is reported. The main tool for this study was a modular program developed in C where the truss structure may be optimized over an N-dimensional space of continuous values for the member cross sectional areas or a discrete set of chosen values. A new heuristic is introduced in the SA's generation mechanism to perform changes in the topology of the structure while the member cross-sectional areas are minimized, enabling the program to remove the redundant members, for generating reduced structures.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

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)0.9940.984

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.145
Teacher spread0.142 · 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