MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2378494878

Comparison of snow load requirements in design codes used in China,USA,Canada and EU

2011· article· en· W2378494878 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hong Hanping

Bibliographic record

VenueHa'erbin gongye daxue xuebao · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowEuropean standardChinaGableRoofEnvironmental scienceCivil engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringMeteorologyGeographyTransport engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study compares the snow load provisions recommended in design codes used in China,USA,Canada and the EU.It shows that the basic snow load requirements in Chinese standard are too simplistic to cope with major factors that control the complex roof snow load patterns.The recommended critical roof slope in Chinese standard is the lowest among the considered four design codes.Furthermore,the recommended snow loads for the gable,arched and step roofs in Chinese standard differ from the other three design codes in terms of the snow load pattern.The comparison allowed us to suggest some preliminary modifications to snow load requirements in Chinese standard,although a detailed probability-based calibration is needed to confirm the recommended changes.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHa'erbin gongye daxue xuebaoSame topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207