Bibliographic record
Abstract
As Storm Tor struck the western coast of Norway, wind speeds and bridge deck accelerations along the Hardanger Bridge girder were recorded by the monitoring system installed on the bridge. Using 13.5 h of data, mean wind speed, turbulence intensities, gust factor, turbulence length scales, angle-of-attack, and one-point and two-point turbulence spectra are studied using 10-minute stationary averaging intervals. Using the measured turbulence statistics as inputs, the buffeting response of the bridge deck is calculated in the frequency domain. The calculated response is compared with the measured response in terms of the root-mean-square (RMS) of acceleration and displacement components and the power spectral density of the acceleration response. Significant discrepancies are found in the case of the vertical response. Predicting the spectral response is found to be more difficult than predicting the RMS response, in particular for high-frequency responses. Considering the spanwise non-uniformity of turbulence statistics did not affect the predictions significantly.
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 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".