MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594814665 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2016-0334

Stiffness model for gypsum wallboard-to-wood joints

2017· article· en· W2594814665 on OpenAlex
Alex Lafontaine, Ghasan Doudak

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFastenerStiffnessStructural engineeringSlip (aerodynamics)Shear (geology)BrittlenessSlippageGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Joints simulating typical connections of gypsum wallboard (GWB) sheathed walls were subjected to reversed cyclic loading. Three different empirical models were analyzed for the purpose of determining the most appropriate fastener slip equation. The power model was used to develop the fastener slip equations, for nails and screws, as a function of GWB density and fastener diameter. The accuracy of the developed fastener slip model is validated against full-scale shear wall tests. The predictive models seem to be able to replicate the wall behaviour with reasonable accuracy until ultimate capacity. The results show a reasonable agreement between the model prediction and those obtained from the shear wall tests. The model prediction for shear walls constructed with low fastener spacing is less accurate. This result was expected since the small fastener spacing violates the minimum spacing requirements in the design standard (CSA 2014) and caused a brittle failure.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.195 · 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