MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Model Comparisons of a Partially Strengthened Flexible Beam

2010· article· en· W2319351752 on OpenAlexaff
Mehrdad R. Kermani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modelling and Simulation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeam (structure)Timoshenko beam theoryActuatorBoundary value problemRayleigh–Ritz methodTorqueEquations of motionControl theory (sociology)MechanicsPhysicsMathematicsClassical mechanicsStructural engineeringMathematical analysisEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, three modelling theories for a partially strengthened beam are compared. The effect of an actuator with large force capability on the natural frequencies and mode shapes of the beam is studied. More specifically, three modelling techniques, namely Euler–Bernoulli, Rayleigh–Ritz, Timoshenko beam theories in conjunction with the generalized Hamilton's principle are utilized to derive the equation of motion and the boundary conditions of a partially actuated beam. The effect of the actuator is considered as an external torque on the sub-boundary conditions. A solution for the resulting equations for each modelling technique is obtained and a model of the beam strengthened with the actuator is derived. To evaluate the accuracy of each model, simulation results are compared to those experimentally obtained from a beam.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modelling and SimulationSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207