MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2353393040 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2015-0452

Investigating the behaviour of typical and designed wall-to-floor connections in light-frame wood stud wall structures subjected to blast loading

2016· article· en· W2353393040 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConnection (principal bundle)Structural engineeringFrame (networking)EngineeringBoundary value problemShear wallBoundary (topology)Mechanical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of light-frame wood stud walls under simulated blast loading has so far been limited to investigating the behaviour of structural elements with idealized boundary conditions. The current study investigates, experimentally and analytically, whether walls with prescriptive connection detailing for low and high seismic and wind regions are capable of resisting blast loadings such that the walls’ ultimate capacity can be reached. The study also investigates the behaviour of different connections with various design capacity levels to develop failure in the stud wall system rather than in the connection. A total of ten full-scale walls with different boundary conditions were tested dynamically. The results showed that typical prescriptive connection detailing did not perform adequately. Designed connections performed well, but the findings show that basing the connection design solely on capacity may be inadequate. Single degree-of-freedom modelling may only be utilized if damage in the connections is limited.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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