MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173343558 · doi:10.11159/icgre21.lx.103

A Study of the Influence of Water Content Profile on the Dynamic Behavior of Rammed Earth Structures

2021· article· en· W3173343558 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juan P. Villacreses, Bernardo Caicedo, Felipe Poveda, Fabricio Yèpez, Laura Ibagón, Julián Buriticá

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHygrothermal properties of building materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRammed earthEarth (classical element)Content (measure theory)Geotechnical engineeringWater contentComputer scienceGeologyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research assesses the influence of water content in the dynamic performance of rammed earth structures.The procedure uses a finite element model based on hypothetical moisture profiles.The finite element model uses six layers where materials were assigned based on the water content profile.The research uses seven water profiles to establish the saturation degree as a function of wall depth.The mechanical properties for each layer were assigned according to the water content profile.Finally, the frequencies and modal shapes of the structure were calculated using a finite element model.The results showed an important change in the structural stiffness.Then, a response spectrum of accelerations was used to analyze the difference in the dynamic response of the structure due to the water content profile.The results suggest that the walls have different seismic behavior at the beginning of the construction phase and change with the different residual water content states of the structure.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicHygrothermal properties of building materialsFrench-language works237,207