MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330948566 · doi:10.3130/aijs.73.1127

FORMULAE TO PREDICT THE ELASTIC AND PLASTIC BEHAVIOR OF SHEATHED WALLS WITH UNCOVERED POSTS IN CONVENTIONAL POST AND BEAM STRUCTURES

2008· article· en· W2330948566 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

VenueJournal of Structural and Construction Engineering (Transactions of AIJ) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban and spatial planning
Canadian institutionsAssociation of Canadian Archivists
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrussStructural engineeringDiagonalShear wallDuctility (Earth science)Materials scienceBeam (structure)Shear (geology)Composite materialMathematicsEngineeringGeometryCreep

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generally in Japanese style rooms, sheathed walls with uncovered post have spread instead of mud walls. The sheathing material is nailed and inserted in the frame with noggings. The formula to calculate the elastic strength, yield point, ultimate strength and the ductility of factor has been derived for sheathed wall, considering the elements of the shear resistance of the nail struck in the noggings and frame, and the diagonal compression resistance of the sheathing material as truss action. In order to verify the formula, the shear examinations of sheathed walls have been carried out where five kinds of different sheathing material have been used. It is clear that the formula is sufficiently accurate to predict the elastic and plastic behavior of sheathed walls with uncovered post for structural calculation.

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 score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.165 · 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