Bibliographic record
Abstract
Key factors which govern the wind-induced torsional response, especially the torsional loads, are discussed in this paper. These factors include building geometry of the floor plan and of the elevation, building surroundings, and structural dynamic properties. Due to the complication and variation of these factors from case to case, the presented discussion is focussed on the floor plan geometry for torsional static loads, and natural frequency and dynamic coupling for the torsional dynamic loads. With definition of equivalent eccentricity, e, and load reduction factor, r, the magnitudes of torsional loads for several tall buildings are investigated with respect to the corresponding horizontal wind loads. The complicated nature of torsional response also affects the precision of wind tunnel tests, although wind tunnel tests are still considered to be the most reliable approach. Normally, the torsional response cannot be measured with the same degree of completeness as for sway response using the wind tunnel force balance model. Selecting an appropriate wind tunnel method for torsional response is therefore also considered to be a key factor. With discussion on the recent developments in wind tunnel technique, guidance for selecting the wind tunnel method is suggested.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".