MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166864180 · doi:10.1177/0021998312467385

A novel system of parametric analytical modeling techniques for transversely loaded fibre reinforced polymer structural members of variable material properties and cross-sectional geometry

2012· article· en· W2166864180 on OpenAlexaff
Hart Honickman, Jennifer Johrendt, Andrew Glover, A. P. Valentine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParametric statisticsFinite element methodComputer scienceSoftwareStructural engineeringFidelityMaterials scienceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A broad class of structural problems has been recognized as being non-conducive to the use of conventional state-of-the-art structural analysis techniques involving the finite element method. This class of problems includes long fibre reinforced polymer structural members having non-uniform, continuously variable material properties and cross-sectional geometry. A novel composite leaf spring is being developed (Thunder Composite Technologies, Ltd.), which will likely prove to be superior to the conventional leaf springs that it aims to replace. However, this new spring belongs to the aforementioned class of problems and will therefore necessitate unconventional and highly complex design and analysis techniques due to the anisotropy and non-homogeneity of its constituents. As such, a design and analysis software tool was developed to be capable of collecting user stipulated parameters and performance specifications, generating a design that is capable of meeting these requirements and performing a high-fidelity structural analysis on the resulting design in order to verify its performance. The following paper summarizes the engineering science and programming methodologies employed by this design tool and discusses how similar methodologies could be employed in the design and analysis of other structural members that reside within this class of problems.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 venueJournal of Composite MaterialsSame topicStructural Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207