MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2495985339 · doi:10.5539/mas.v10n9p112

Form-finding Tensegrity Models Approach with Reverse Engineering

2016· article· en· W2495985339 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hashem Hashemnejad, Asem Sharbaf, Mitra Sharbaf

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTensegrityComputer scienceFlexibility (engineering)ModalStructural engineeringMathematicsEngineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives:After recent achievements in the field of Tensegrity structure, many Tensegrity models have been investigated and evaluated. Tensegrity models have been used as symbolic or covering vast area such as fuller’s dome and other stuffs. These usages do not have sufficient attention to synthesis of architectural and structural space together.Methods/Statistical analysis: The method of this article, based on simulation and modeling of a sample structure by analyzing flow of internal forces, is adaptive methode. Restriction of exited structures to a hammock and then analysis its force flow, and consequently classify it to tensile and compressive members is the base of manner. By gathering information about Tensegrity structures and their behavior according to several definition of structural engineers and also architects, we commence combination of facts based on adaptation of existed structures with Tensegrity rules. Then, by finding a Tensegrity model and creating a replica of hammock Tensegrity, it shows the ability of structure specially in term of statistic. This outcomes can help us to develop new system of form - finding models.Findings: This system can make us able to develop modeling of Tensegrity. In the recent years, form - finding method almost base on symmetric models to expand as cover structure for vast spans. By this manner, we can design asymmetric models consist of synthesis of structural and architectural space.Application/Improvements: Form - Finding method can be developed in order to increase quality of building in term of weight of structure, flexibility, decreasing proportion of used material to its resistance and so on. In addition, we can produce asymmetric models which contain architectural space into Tensegrity structure.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.160 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicStructural Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207