MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recent Developments in North American Aluminum Structural Design Codes

2016· article· en· W2522462522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joe Kissell

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConstruction Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAluminiumAssociation (psychology)Perspective (graphical)EngineeringComputer scienceStructural engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since INALCO 2013, the two main North American aluminum structural design codes – the Canadian Standards Association’s (CSA) S157 Strength Design in Aluminum and the Aluminum Association’s Specification for Aluminum Structures – have undergone significant changes. S157’s 2015 edition is the first significant revision of the Canadian aluminum structural standard since 2005, and the 2015 update of the Specification for Aluminum Structures is the first since 2010. This paper addresses the specific changes and their trends, viewed from a larger perspective to anticipate the future direction of these codes.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicConstruction Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207