MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Case Study on Modeling Fire Action Complexity in Fire Safety Engineering of Structures

2017· article· en· W2591926082 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced engineering forum · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFire safetyFire protection engineeringFire protectionAction (physics)RestructuringEngineeringModular designArchitectural engineeringField (mathematics)Construction engineeringCivil engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Important goals in the fire safety design, such as preventing loss of life and goods damage, are achieved by maintaining the stability of structures exposed to fire for a period of time established by norms and standards. Real fire scenarios confirm that the specific technical regulations which actually have a prescriptive character (both national and international) do not deal with sufficient possibilities regarding the assessment of structural fire safety. The new approach on structural safety, based on engineering notions, gives us additional prospects on it and it is included in the issues of the fire safety design of structures. A relatively new field of study, known by a few professionals focused on fire safety (but well acknowledged in the research area), fire safety design met with lots of changes and restructuring of the governing concepts and procedures and of the information with which they operate, due to the fast accumulation of experience in this area of engineering activity. Consequently, after countries such as Australia, Canada, New Zeeland or USA provided towards professionals specific technical regulations for fire safety design, groups of experts in these aforementioned countries have joined their forces to try to diminish the differences that exists between those regulations and to give a unitary character to them, a better conceptualized engineering approach of the fire safety design. The result: occurrence of the publication International Fire Engineering Guidelines (last edition from 2005). The systematic approach of fire safety design in constructions pointed, once again, the possibility of modular organization of this field of study, the relations between modules being established according to the objective or objectives in the fire safety design for a specified building. This article aims to put forward, from this modularized perspective, the study of the fire safety design of a building exposed to fire; hence, the practical part of the article exhibits the numerical simulation of initialization and development of the fire process for a large scale religious building. The main features of the building represent the amount of space that facilitates the spreading of smoke and warm gases and which increases the risk of damaging the structural reinforced concrete elements. Application calls to specific numerical simulation with a higher degree of credibility, such as those realized by the FDS (Fire Dynamics Simulation) software.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.237 · 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