MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330658542 · doi:10.1061/9780784479117.240

Comparison of Timber-Hybrid Structures Using Static Analysis

2015· article· en· W2330658542 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 2015 · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTowerSizingFrame (networking)Structural systemTuned mass damperStructural engineeringEngineeringRangingCivil engineeringComputer scienceArchitectural engineeringDamperMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in mass timber construction technology, and the success of recent mid-rise timber structures, indicate the potential for large-scale structures in wood. Several high-rise timber-based hybrid systems ranging from 30 to 42 stories have been proposed but have yet to be realized, in part due to lack of design guidance and concerns about seismic performance, fire, and overall feasibility. This investigation examines three proposed structures: the “FFTT” system from MGB Architects, the “Concrete Jointed Timber Frame” from Skidmore Owings Merrill, and the “LifeCycle Tower” from CREE GmbH. Each is evaluated using Linear Static Analysis for static gravity loads and the loads from the additional mass of Multiple Tuned Liquid Column Dampers, intended to provide not only seismic damping but on-site fire sprinkler supply as well. A comparison of the outcomes provides a basis for future differentiation between the proposed systems including the sizing of members and connections and estimation of initial construction costs.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.269 · 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