MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134020467 · doi:10.1061/9780784412626.008

Observations on ASCE 7-10 Methods for Determining Wind Loads

2012· article· en· W2134020467 on OpenAlexaff
Emil Simiu, CW Letchford, N. Isyumov, Arindam Chowdhury, DongHun Yeo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsWind engineeringWind tunnelCladding (metalworking)Wind forceEngineeringStructural engineeringWind speedCivil engineeringMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyAerospace engineeringMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to discuss methods for determining wind loads on buildings and other structures that warrant comment, correction or improvement. The assessment is intended to serve as a resource as a new version of the American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE-7 Standard is being prepared. Issues discussed in the paper include: wind speeds in non-hurricane regions; alternative analytical methods for determining wind loads and wind effects on Main Wind Force Resisting Systems and Components/Cladding; aerodynamic pressure coefficients; pressures on rooftop equipment; component and cladding pressures on arched roofs; and the wind tunnel procedure.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207