MétaCan
Menu

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

VenueProgress in Structural Engineering and Materials · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)DirectoryEngineeringResource (disambiguation)Production (economics)Architectural engineeringConstruction engineeringForensic engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review is intended to serve as a directory of where authoritative, current, resource material can be found relating to all aspects of the design of tubular steel structures. The scope is predominantly limited to onshore structures, using cold- or hot-formed manufactured tubing. Most of the guidance publications cited have a high degree of international consensus, are published in the 1990s and are readily accessible by the international design community, with many available in multiple languages. The article also summarizes the range of tolerances in geometric properties that are permitted in various countries, for the manufacture of rectangular, square and circular hollow sections. Certain countries have excessively liberal production tolerances and this has the consequence of eroding safety margins in structures which use such tubes since manufacturers tend to produce to the minimum standards permitted. This has been a particular issue in the US and the way the problem has been addressed by the American Institute of Steel Construction is described.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.188 · 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