Impact Tests for IRIS_2010 Benchmark Exercise
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IRIS_2010 benchmark was an exercise in OECD/NEA/CSNI framework. This exercise concentrated on improving robustness assessment methodologies for structures impacted by missiles. This article describes experimental tests included in the exercise. These tests consisted of two tests for bending, three for punching and one for combined punching and bending behaviour of reinforced concrete walls under impact loading. The test for combined behaviour was carried out in Meppen, Germany in the 1980’s, while all the other tests were carried out by VTT Technical research centre of Finland during the spring of 2010. In the bending behaviour tests, 0.15 m thick simply supported square concrete walls with span width of 2 m were impacted with soft missiles weighing ∼50 kg and having velocity of ∼110 m/s at the impact moment. The impacts resulted maximum displacements of 29-32 mm at the centre of the wall with the permanent values being 8-9 mm. In the punching behaviour tests, similar walls but with thickness of 0.25 m were impacted with hard missiles weighing ∼47.5 kg and having velocity of ∼135 m/s at the impact moment. The impacts resulted perforation of the wall by the missile with residual velocity of the missile being 34-46 m/s. In addition, the walls suffered severe scabbing on the backside with the scabbed area being 1.00-1.12 m 2 .
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it