MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121230781 · doi:10.1061/geosek.0000114

Reliability-Based Design (RBD) For Everyone: (No Monte Carlo Simulation Required!)

2019· article· en· W3121230781 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard J. Bathurst

Bibliographic record

VenueGEOSTRATA Magazine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimit state designReliability (semiconductor)Monte Carlo methodProbabilistic logicBridge (graph theory)EngineeringMargin (machine learning)Limit (mathematics)Reliability engineeringResistance FactorsProbabilistic designPoint (geometry)Structural loadStructural engineeringComputer scienceMathematicsEngineering design processStatisticsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In North America, the design of earth structures for transportation applications is most often carried out using load and resistance factor design (LRFD). In the U.S., the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications are followed. In Canada, the primary code is the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code. The premise behind LRFD is that when a limit state design equation is used with prescribed load and resistance factors, a minimum margin of safety, expressed as a reliability index b, or probability of failure, is assumed to be assured. Unless the design is at the point where the limit-state equation is satisfied, the true margin of safety in probabilistic terms is unknown. Furthermore, designers may have a choice of load and resistance models to use in a limit-state design equation. Because these models will have different accuracies, using different design models with the same load and resistance factors will result in different true margins of safety in probabilistic terms.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGEOSTRATA MagazineSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207