MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334042864 · doi:10.1061/40889(201)27

Blast Mitigation for Structures

2006· article· en· W2334042864 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Baird, R. Allen Nolte, Donald Selke

Bibliographic record

VenueStructures Congress 2006 · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsDawson College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructabilityEngineeringTest (biology)Empirical researchShock (circulatory)Scale (ratio)Construction engineeringArchitectural engineeringMechanical engineeringCivil engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work documented herein is a portion of a multi-organizational effort lead by the University of Missouri-Rolla (UMR) Rock Mechanics and Explosives Research Center, with the following participants: Kontek Industries, the Air Force Research Laboratory Airbase Technologies Division, UMR's Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, the Department of Architectural Studies from the University of Missouri-Columbia (UMC), and UMC's National Center for Explosion Resistant Design. The ultimate goal of this multi-year project is to establish prototypical functionality and architectural standards for blast-resistant barricade systems through applied research, design, and test efforts. This paper specifically addresses the results of efforts by UMR and Kontek to design and test barrier structures that protect other structures, and mitigate pressure loads and shock hydrodynamic effects on structural barriers, columns, beams, and bents. As a part of this effort, we are examining structural load path transfer during a blast, in order to provide additional support to portions of structure under attack. Continuation of the current close coordination among the authors in the areas of analytical modeling and blast design and test, as well as the commercial constructability, allows the design of mid-scale and full-scale experiments to populate and validate empirical models for blast barriers, to include off-axis pressure prediction and the development of empirical-based algorithm for prediction of blast pressures around structures and barriers.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructures Congress 2006Same topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207