MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375867808 · doi:10.1061/ppscfx.sceng-1277

Lessons Learned in Large-Scale Revamp Projects

2023· article· en· W4375867808 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePractice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruction engineeringScale (ratio)EngineeringComputer scienceSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes effective design procedures and identify construction challenges encountered in mega revamp projects. Lessons learned through the execution of these projects are discussed. The paper fills existing gaps and pieces together engineering requirements for critical structures that are used in heavy industry. Numerical and simplified analytical models are provided to assist the engineers to model load transfers with reasonable accuracy. An overview of loading mechanisms of various systems is also provided for operational, testing and lifting conditions. Industrial examples are provided for steel modules, pipe racks, and equipment support systems. The procedures presented in the paper are computationally efficient and can be implemented in practice. The theoretical basis and merits of various methods used in the practice are also discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.275 · 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