MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Local Buckling Tests on Cold-Formed Steel Beams

2003· article· en· W2004889927 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingCold-formed steelStructural engineeringClassification of discontinuitiesBendingCold formingFlexural strengthAxial symmetryMaterials scienceEngineeringMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C and Z sections are two of the most common cold-formed steel shapes in use today. Accurate prediction of the bending performance of these sections is important for reliable and efficient cold-formed steel structures. Recent analytical work has highlighted discontinuities and inconsistencies in the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) and Canadian Standards Association (S136) design provisions for stiffened elements under a stress gradient (i.e., the web of C or Z sections). New methods have been proposed for design, and an interim method has been adopted in the North American Specification (NAS). However, existing tests on C and Z sections do not provide a definitive evaluation of the design expressions, due primarily to incomplete restriction of the distortional buckling mode. Described in this paper is a series of flexural tests with details selected specifically to insure that local buckling is free to form, but distortional buckling and lateral-torsional buckling are restricted. The members selected for the tests provide systematic variation in the web slenderness (h/t) while varying other relevant nondimensional parameters (i.e., h/b,b/t,d/t,d/b). Initial analysis of the completed testing indicates that overall test-to-predicted ratios for AISI, S136, NAS, and the direct strength method are all adequate, but systematic differences are observed.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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