MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180610407 · doi:10.56748/ejse.14177

Design of Steel I-Beams: A Proposed Equation

2014· article· en· W3180610407 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Journal of Structural Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringSteel designFinite element methodNonlinear systemEngineeringMoment (physics)MathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design of laterally unsupported steel I-section beams according to Allowable Stress Design (ASD) and Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) techniques involves usage of multiple equations. According to most codes of practice, three distinct zones are established for the behaviour of laterally unsupported steel beams. Each of these zones is defined by a different design equation. In this paper, a single equation which defines the moment resistance is suggested for the three zones defining the behaviour of laterally unsupported steel beams. Results of the proposed equations are compared to those obtained using the design provisions of the Egyptian, Canadian and American codes of practice (ECP-LRFD 2008, CAN/CSA S16-09 2009 and AISC 2010, respectively). The proposed equation is also verified against results obtained from nonlinear numerical analysis based on the finite element technique for steel I-beams.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.180 · 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