MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056042003 · doi:10.1260/026635105775870260

Evaluation of Biological Deployable Systems

2005· article· en· W2056042003 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

VenueInternational Journal of Space Structures · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsStructural systemComputer scienceEarthwormEngineeringEcologyBiologyStructural engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents a survey of deployable structural systems found in some biological organisms. Four biological systems are presented and analysed in terms of their morphology, kinematics and structural characteristics. This presentation is followed by an evaluation of the similarity of the biological systems with existing deployable structures and of potential applications. The four biological systems surveyed are two types of insect wings – Coleoptera (beetles) and locust; locomotion of the earthworm; and the jaw of the egg eater snake ( Dasypeltis). These systems represent a diversity of deployable mechanisms. The paper concludes by associating the surveyed and other biological systems with known deployable structural systems such as: folded plates, tensioned membrane, pneumatic tubes ( pneus) and structures composed of articulated rigid members.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.254 · 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