MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415816654 · doi:10.1680/jstbu.15.00009

Experimentally based <i>q</i>-factor estimation of cross-laminated timber walls

2016· article· en· W2415816654 on OpenAlexaff
Luca Pozza, Roberto Scotta, Davide Trutalli, Andrea Polastri, Ian F. C. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and Buildings · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross laminated timberRange (aeronautics)Structural engineeringShear wallInterpretation (philosophy)EngineeringMathematicsStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behaviour factor values applicable to cross-laminated timber (CLT) buildings are determined and several variables influencing construction are examined. The necessary experimental tests and analytical interpretation for estimating the behaviour factors for CLT wall systems, characterised as they are by several types of layout, were performed. The information given in this paper may be used to estimate the behaviour factor of whole CLT buildings. The results show that the proposed q-factors confirm that construction design decisions affect the seismic responses of buildings, as opposed to single values applied to all CLT buildings. The experimentally based approach used here was applied to physical test data for five CLT shear-wall arrangements. The results may be applied to a wide range of design situations, as analyses of common CLT specimens and simple generalisation of this method can be extended to other systems and configurations.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations31
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and BuildingsSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207