MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037401058 · doi:10.1115/pvp2009-77896

Implications of Limit Analysis on the Evaluation of Locally Thinned Vessels and Pipes

2009· article· en· W2037401058 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

VenueVolume 2: Computer Applications/Technology and Bolted Joints · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimit (mathematics)ThinningStructural engineeringStress (linguistics)CylinderLimit analysisMaterials scienceSection (typography)Computer scienceEngineeringFinite element methodMathematicsMechanical engineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evaluation of locally thinned vessels and pipes by Design-by-Analysis is currently not well defined in Section III. The present paper uses limit analysis results to study plastic failure mechanisms in a locally thinned cylinder. Parameters studied include the axial and circumferential extent of the thinned region, the amount of available reinforcement outside the thinned region and the circumferential distribution of thinning. On this basis, the amount of thinning justifiable within Section III margins for limit analysis is studied. Implications for Code primary stress limits are discussed.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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