MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991461841 · doi:10.1115/detc2010-28942

Using Level Set Method in Order to Design Structures Against Buckling

2010· article· en· W1991461841 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil, Finite Element Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingSet (abstract data type)Topology (electrical circuits)Level set (data structures)Stability (learning theory)Topology optimizationComputer scienceLevel set methodMargin (machine learning)Mathematical optimizationOrder (exchange)Structural engineeringMathematicsEngineeringFinite element methodArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The level set approach has been used as a powerful tool in designing structures with a proper safety margin against stability and buckling issues. In this article a closed form equation for critical buckling load of any arbitrary topology has been proposed and employed in Level Set formulation in order to maximize it. Results show that the Level Set Method is straight forward and easy to implement, with fewer limitations overall in the topology optimization of engineering 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil, Finite Element MethodsFrench-language works237,207