MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967732195 · doi:10.1139/l04-083

Nonlinear spectral dynamic analysis of guyed towers. Part I: Theory

2004· article· en· W1967732195 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Amir M. Horr

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersManitoba Hydro
KeywordsNonlinear systemFinite element methodStructural engineeringStructural dynamicsSpace (punctuation)Spectral element methodBucklingComputer scienceEngineeringMixed finite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the important parameters in the analysis and design of large space structures is to account for the dynamic forces induced by wind and the subsequent progressive collapse. During the past two decades, problems of extreme loading conditions have been considered by some authors, and special attention has been devoted to the collapse modes. Nonlinear time history dynamic analysis, involving the post-buckling characteristics of the space structures, may be analyzed using the conventional finite element method. However, to guarantee stability and accuracy of the solution, the number of elements used to model the structure may be very large. In this respect, the nonlinear spectral element method (SEM) is developed for analyzing dynamic problems in large space structures. Through use of a computer program, the proposed method has been used to obtain the nonlinear dynamic response of guyed power transmission towers under severe wind loading condition. Key words: nonlinear dynamic analysis, space structures, guyed towers, spectral element method.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207