MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325496662 · doi:10.1061/9780784412367.146

Seismic Behavior of Steel HSS X-Bracing of the Conventional Construction Category

2012· article· en· W2325496662 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 2012 · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBracingBraceStructural engineeringQuasistatic processBrittlenessCompression (physics)Connection (principal bundle)Intersection (aeronautics)EngineeringQuasistatic loadingBraced frameTension (geology)Computer scienceMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringFrame (networking)Composite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of an ongoing research project on the seismic performance of concentrically braced steel frames of the Conventional Construction category designed according to NBCC 2010 and CSA-S16 seismic provisions. The braced frames studied are of the tension-compression X-bracing configuration and special attention is devoted to the response of the connection at the brace intersection point. Numerical simulations were performed to determine the inelastic demand on the braces and brace connections. A test program including four full-scale quasistatic cyclic tests was carried out to verify the findings of the numerical simulations. The results indicate that the behaviour of the bracing members is influenced by the type of mid-connection. In particular, connections with single lap splices at the intersection of the braces may be prone to local instability. In all tests, failure occurred in the connections, indicating that more attention must be paid in design to prevent premature and brittle failure in connections.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

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 head0.226
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