MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212232494 · doi:10.1115/imece2001/pvp-25209

Analysis of Curved Beams by the B-Spline Field Approximation Method

2001· article· en· W3212232494 on OpenAlexaff
A. H. Vermeulen, G. R. Heppler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsA priori and a posterioriDeflection (physics)Timoshenko beam theoryBernoulli's principleSpline (mechanical)Computer scienceBeam (structure)MathematicsPhysicsClassical mechanicsOpticsStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The B-spline field approximation method is applied to the static deflection analysis of curved Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko beams. A formal definition of membrane locking is presented along with a simple test that allows a priori determination of a models susceptibility to membrane locking. Formulations for both types of beam models, that under certain discretizations experience membrane locking, are presented and additional formulations that can never experience membrane locking are presented for both beam models. Examples that demonstrate the efficacy of the membrane locking test and illustrate the two means of avoiding membrane locking are presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.253
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
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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVibration and Dynamic AnalysisFrench-language works237,207