MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316908530 · doi:10.1061/41016(314)61

Structural Performance of Stud Walls under Normal and Post-Earthquake Fire Exposure

2008· article· en· W2316908530 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStructures Congress 2008 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFire hazardFire resistanceFire performanceEarthquake resistanceStructural engineeringFrame (networking)Fire protectionStructural systemFire safetyEarthquake shaking tableHazardEvent (particle physics)Forensic engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceCivil engineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wood frame house construction is very common in North America. These structures are vulnerable to fire hazard, fire following an earthquake event is not uncommon. After an earthquake the structure may sustain a considerable damage and the fire resistance of the system will be significantly impaired. Current building codes do not take this into account adequately. This article presents a framework for carrying out a systematic study for post-earthquke fire performance of buildings structures. In addition, a simulation of fire performance of a stud wall system has been carried out. The wall system was a part of an earlier experimental study. The validated simulation model would be used from futher analysis of post-earthquake fire response as envisioned in the framework presented here.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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