MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344731973 · doi:10.1177/0731684415627296

Hybrid bonded-fastened joints and their application in composite structures: A general review

2016· review· en· W2344731973 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 Reinforced Plastics and Composites · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceAdhesive bondingAdhesiveComposite numberComposite materialStructural engineeringFocus (optics)Forensic engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid bonding-fastening is an alternative joining technique that consists of simultaneous adhesive bonding and mechanical fastening of the adherends. In this paper, pertinent scientific publications are selected and reviewed in an attempt to synthesize the current knowledge on various aspects of this technique. A particular focus is maintained on its application in composite structures. Two major bonding-fastening methods, namely bonding-bolting and bonding-pinning, are identified and contrasted, and the characteristics of each are discussed. Existing gaps in the literature are identified. Finally, perspectives for future research are assessed.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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