MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024181068 · doi:10.1145/2366145.2366178

Structural optimization of 3D masonry buildings

2012· article· en· W2024181068 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Emily Whiting, Hijung Valentina Shin, Robert Wang, John Ochsendorf, Frédo Durand

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSamsung
KeywordsSoundnessVertex (graph theory)MasonryDisplacement (psychology)Computer scienceOrientation (vector space)Gradient descentMeasure (data warehouse)MinificationGeometryStructural engineeringMathematicsMathematical optimizationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the design of buildings, structural analysis is traditionally performed after the aesthetic design has been determined and has little influence on the overall form. In contrast, this paper presents an approach to guide the form towards a shape that is more structurally sound. Our work is centered on the study of how variations of the geometry might improve structural stability. We define a new measure of structural soundness for masonry buildings as well as cables, and derive its closed-form derivative with respect to the displacement of all the vertices describing the geometry. We start with a gradient descent tool which displaces each vertex along the gradient. We then introduce displacement operators, imposing constraints such as the preservation of orientation or thickness; or setting additional objectives such as volume minimization.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations65
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207