MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2267630749

풍하중을 받는 고층건물의 진동 가속도 응답-각국의 하중기준과 풍동실험 비교-

2004· article· ko· W2267630749 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
유기표

Bibliographic record

Venue대한건축학회 논문집 - 구조계 · 2004
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind tunnelMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceWind forceStructural engineeringGeographyEngineeringAerospace engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For tall buildings the magnitude of wind induced building motions is an important design consideration. Under the influence of dynamic wind loads, typical tall building oscillate in the alongwind, acrosswind and torsional directions. The codes and standards by this study are Japan, United States, Canada, Korea. The wind tuneel data of building section model having sectional area of 0.01㎡and the height of 0.4m with side ratio denoted as D/B, of 1.0 was selected for force balance experimental study. Two types of atmospheric flow conditions which represent suburban (α=0.15) and urban(α=0.33) flow environment were simulated in the wind tunnel. All measurements were made in a boundary layer wind tunnel at the Chonbuk National University Wind-tunnel Lab. In this paper, the comparison between the acceleration response predicted by wind tunnel data and estimated by provisions in codes.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.019

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue대한건축학회 논문집 - 구조계Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207