MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Curvature Monitoring of Beams Using Digital Image Correlation

2013· article· en· W2050887420 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

VenueJournal of Bridge Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital image correlationStrain gaugeCurvatureBeam (structure)Measure (data warehouse)Gauge (firearms)Structural engineeringOpticsAcousticsMaterials sciencePhysicsMathematicsGeometryEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for measuring longitudinal strains with the height at a section, and thus the curvature, using a technique based on digital image correlation (DIC), is presented. The background to this technique is introduced as well as previous work in this area. The accuracy of DIC under ideal conditions is established using artificially generated images that represent beams with various curvatures. The practical accuracy of DIC is established by comparing the strains measured using DIC to those predicted by elastic theory and measured using strain gauges for a steel beam. The correlation between these results is found to be excellent. DIC is then used to measure curvatures in RC beams and these results are compared with analytically predicted results with good agreement. The choice of an appropriate gauge length for RC is discussed and is shown to be one of the significant advantages of using DIC as opposed to strain gauges in both laboratory testing and field monitoring of bridge 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.241
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