Simplified analysis of asymmetric high‐rise structures with cores
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
Abstract A simplified elastic hand‐method of analysis for asymmetric multi‐bent structures with cores subjected to horizontal loading is presented. The structures may consist of combinations of framed structures such as coupled walls, rigid frames and braced frames with planar and non‐planar shear walls. Results for structures that are uniform with height compare closely with results from stiffness matrix analyses. The method is developed from coupled‐wall deflection theory which is expressed in non‐dimensional structural parameters. It accounts for bending deformations in all individual members, axial deformations in the vertical members as well as torsion and warping in nonplanar walls. A closed solution of coupled differential equations for deflection and rotation gives the deflected shape along the height of the building from which all internal forces can be obtained. The proposed method of analysis offers a relatively simple and rapid means of comparing the deformations and internal forces of different stability systems for a proposed tall building in the preliminary stages of the design. The derivation of equations for analysis shown in this paper are for unisymmetric stability systems only, but the method is also applicable to general asymmetric structures with cores. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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