MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129147422 · doi:10.2749/vancouver.2017.1344

Column Removal Analysis of Bare Steel Gravity Frames Using Connection Behaviour from Physical Tests

2017· article· en· W3129147422 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReport · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Structural engineeringFraming (construction)Progressive collapseColumn (typography)Connection (principal bundle)Shear (geology)Computer scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceReinforced concreteComposite materialChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>This paper investigates the dynamic response of bare steel framing systems with commonly-used shear connections under several column removal scenarios. The analysis follows the Imperial College London method for progressive collapse assessment, which provides a simplified approach that accounts for the dynamic effects associated with instantaneous column removal and a practical framework for assessing the collapse resistance of a structure. Load–deformation relationships and failure limits for beam-to-column connections under combined moment, shear, and tension used for this study are taken directly from physical test data, providing realistic connection behaviour for the prediction and assessment of dynamic response. The robustness of various shear connections is quantified and compared, and connection parameters that significantly affect performance under dynamic loading are discussed.</p>

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.283 · 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