MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2386599773

STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY ANALYSIS USING STOCHASTIC RESPONSE SURFACE METHOD

2010· article· en· W2386599773 on OpenAlexaff
Ran Hu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolynomial chaosHermite polynomialsCollocation (remote sensing)MathematicsRandom variableApplied mathematicsSurface (topology)PolynomialStochastic processMonte Carlo methodMathematical analysisComputer scienceStatisticsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to propose a stochastic response surface method considering correlated input random variables. The orthogonal transform is adopted to treat the correlated random variables in stochastic response surface method. Explicit polynomials are derived for the forth-order and fifth-order Hermite polynomial chaos expansions of random variables. A C#-language based computer program WHUSRSM (Wuhan University Stochastic Response Surface Method) is developed. Four examples are selected to illustrate the application of the proposed stochastic response surface method. The results indicate that the proposed stochastic response surface method can estimate the structural reliability involving correlated random variables efficiently. A third-order stochastic response surface method is reasonably accurate to calculate failure probabilities between 10-3 and 10-4. However, a fourth-order or fifth-order Hermite polynomial chaos expansions should be used for cases with high dependency between input random variables. The number of collocation points equaling twice the number of unknown coefficients does not ensure the accuracy. In general, it is recommended that the number of collocation points should be at least two times of the number of unknown coefficients of the Hermite polynomial chaos expansion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207