MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stability Analysis of Metal-Plate-Connected Wood Truss Assemblies

2011· article· en· W1988710349 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBracingTrussStructural engineeringBucklingFinite element methodStiffnessDeflection (physics)Critical loadCompression (physics)Materials scienceEngineeringComposite materialBracePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a study on the critical buckling load and lateral bracing force of metal-plate-connected (MPC) wood truss assemblies. A three-dimensional finite-element method (FEM) based computer program was developed, calibrated, and verified with test results. A preliminary reliability analysis was conducted based on the verified FEM model, with consideration of the variation in material properties and the initial out-of-plane deflection of compression webs. The out-of-plane rotational stiffness of MPC connections has a significant effect on the critical buckling load and lateral bracing force ratio of MPC trusses. The critical buckling load could almost be doubled on the basis of an ideally pinned compression web, and the lateral bracing force ratio was found to be generally less than 1% from the test results and numerical analysis. Consequently, the currently used 2% rule of thumb for lateral bracing design may be conservative, by overestimating the lateral bracing force, and may lead to oversized bracing members.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.171 · 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