Analysis of the Duration of High Winds During Landfalling Hurricanes
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
The duration of wind storms over a threshold wind speed value is known to be an important parameter in determining damage and losses, with losses tending to increase with the duration. This is because peak pressures tend to increase with longer duration, many building components and cladding systems are vulnerable to different types of fatigue mechanisms, and the yielding of linear elastic materials in the plastic range depends on the number of load cycles. A hurricane model was used to examine the duration of high winds in the United States at Miami, Galveston, and Charleston with the goal of establishing duration statistics for hurricanes as a function of peak wind speed. It was found that the duration of high winds, defined as the time that the 10 min wind speeds are within 30% of the peak 10 min wind speed, had a significant variation with a range from tens of minutes to more than 20 h, depending on location. The median duration ranged from 1.5 to 4 h at the three locations, depending on location and the design wind speed level (i.e., the risk Category of the building). These results were used to establish a simple normalized model for wind speed as a function of time, which could be used together with the design wind speed to establish load cycles for design.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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