MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338675432 · doi:10.1108/rjta-06-01-2002-b002

STRAIN MEASUREMENT IN FABRICS. PART V: A NON-CONTACT METHOD OF DETERMINING FINITE STRAINS – APPLICATION TO STRAIN FIELDS IN INDUSTRIAL TEXTILES

2002· article· en· W2338675432 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

VenueResearch Journal of Textile and Apparel · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical and Thermal Properties Analysis
Canadian institutionsdPoint Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrain (injury)Joint (building)Structural engineeringFailure mechanismMechanism (biology)Materials scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The method of measuring strain fields in fabrics, described earlier, is applied to an example of heavy industrial fabrics. The example chosen is that of heavy woven conveyor belts. Conveyor belts are limited in their load rating and fatigue life by the means used to join them together. Two forms of joint are used, mechanical joints and spliced joints. Experimentally determined strain fields are used to explain the mechanisms of failure of each type of joint, and to assess the effectiveness of a modified joint. Measurements of strains through the thickness of spliced joints are used to contribute to the understanding of failure mechanisms in such joints.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.170 · 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