MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088508874 · doi:10.1139/l00-077

Second-order analysis for semirigid steel frame design

2001· article· en· W2088508874 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRigidity (electromagnetism)Structural engineeringColumn (typography)Frame (networking)Beam (structure)Connection (principal bundle)Steel frameNonlinear systemComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an analysis method in which both the nonlinear rotational behaviour of beam-to-column connections and second-order (P-Δ and P-δ) effects of beam-column members are explicitly taken into account. By adopting the concept of an end-fixity factor, the proposed method is comprehensive regardless of the end rotational conditions of beam-column members and applies to frames with any combination of pinned, semirigid and rigid beam-to-column connections. In addition, the end-fixity factor simplifies the analysis procedure for semirigid frames. More importantly, the end-fixity factor may be valuable to the design of such structures because it provides a physical interpretation of the extent of rigidity available in a connection. Thus, it provides a convenient way for designers to compare the structural responses of a semirigid member to that of a rigid one. Examples are presented to demonstrate the validity and efficiency of the proposed approach. With only minor modifications, the proposed method is readily implemented in existing rigid frame analysis and design computer programs.Key words: steel frame, semirigid connection, second-order analysis, P-Δ effect.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.194
Teacher spread0.181 · 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