MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2389256652

Design Calculation Methods about Intermediate Stiffening Rings of Large Storage Tanks

2011· article· en· W2389256652 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

VenuePetroleum Engineering Construction · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Structural Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsPCL Construction (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStiffeningStructural engineeringOil storageEngineeringStorage tankWeldingShell (structure)Ring (chemistry)Cross section (physics)Section (typography)Civil engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through the analysis on intermediate stiffening ring design calculation methods from domestic and international standards,especially using theoretical analysis and engineering examples to make comparisons about how to select cross-section size,this article illustrates that the intermediate stiffening ring cross-section size obtained from GB 50341 Code for Design of Vertical Cylindrical Welded Steel Oil is often less than that from API 650Welded Tanks for Oil Storage,and there is a certain risk in the wind resistance stability of the tank shell.API 650 is recommended to validate the design and calculation of intermediate stiffening rings.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.243 · 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