MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612427094 · doi:10.26512/ripe.v2i3.21446

COMPORTAMENTO DE VIGAMENTOS TIPO STUB-GIRDER MODIFICADO

2017· article· pt· W2612427094 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonyony Carlos Jordão Heitor, Sebastião Arthur Lopes de Andrade

Bibliographic record

VenueLatin American Theatre Review (The University of Kansas) · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neste trabalho foi desenvolvida uma pesquisa sobre o comportamento estrutural de um sistema de vigamento de piso tipo stub-girder (Ritchie,1984), modificado para melhor aproveitamento dos perfis em sua fabricação. O estudo preliminar é baseado na modelagem numérica com base na análise linear elástica e posteriormente para formulações não lineares a partir do Método dos Elementos Finitos (MEF), com uso do software ANSYS. O cálculo numérico das resistências foi obtido através da norma CAN-S16-10, Design of steel structures, 2010, da CSA (Canadian Standards Association), para as seções críticas do sistema, que foram encontradas através do critério de von Mises. Com base nos resultados obtidos, foram feitas recomendações de projeto do sistema e foram avaliadas as condições de economia de material quando comparadas às vigas mistas. Com vistas à fase de construção, é feita a discussão sobre a possibilidade de obtenção de um método construtivo industrializado, já que o sistema de fabricação é caracterizado pela rapidez de fabricação e a montagem é feita através de painéis pré-fabricados, o que dispensa escoramento na fase de concretagem.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLatin American Theatre Review (The University of Kansas)Same topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207