MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555608841 · doi:10.1002/stco.201610039

Re‐evaluation of the shear criterion for RHS overlap joints

2016· article· en· W2555608841 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

VenueSteel Construction · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBraceChord (peer-to-peer)Structural engineeringShear (geology)Materials scienceEngineeringComputer scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper deals with a proposal to revise the effective width terms in the brace shear criterion for overlap joints in rectangular hollow sections (RHS). The background to the design equations in ISO 14346 for the failure modes, brace effective width, chord M‐N interaction and brace shear are described first. That is followed by the relation between overlap joints in circular hollow sections and those in rectangular hollow sections and those with an I‐ or H‐section chord. Finally, it is shown that the effective width terms in the brace shear criterion can – in the case of 100 % overlap joints – be better related to the thickness of the overlapped brace. In the case of smaller overlaps, λ ov,limit ≤ λ ov ≤ 100 %, the effective width should also be related to the thickness of the overlapping brace, where λ ov,limit depends on whether the hidden seam at the toe of the overlapped brace has been welded.

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)0.000
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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.229 · 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