Peak Wind Load Comparison: Theoretical Estimates and ASCE 7
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new procedure to derive the distribution of peak pressure and load coefficients from individual sample records is applied to wind tunnel records obtained from a generic flat-roof model tested at the Univ. of Western Ontario (UWO). The initial step of this procedure requires the identification of the appropriate marginal probability of these records. The corresponding distribution of the peaks is then obtained with the use of the standard translation process. Predicted load coefficients over variable tributary areas as determined from UWO records and based on a preset probability of non-exceedence are compared with the provisions of the ASCE 7 standard. Based on the open-terrain observations, the code provisions generally correspond to relatively low levels of nonexceedence of 84% or less. The ASCE 7 suggested method to estimate the peak pressure coefficients for the suburban environment based on those for the open terrain could be successfully applied to the UWO observations. This, however, is generally not true when performing a similar estimation procedure for peak load coefficients from the Clemson experiments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it