Felsbauplanung mit dem geotechnischen Werkzeugkasten von morgen: Eurocode und die Grundlagen der Planung von Tragwerken und geotechnischen Bauwerken (die zweite Generation der EN 1990 und EN 1997)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The current first generation of Eurocodes is a suite of ten European standards for the design of buildings and civil engineering works, whose implementation started in 2010. EN 1990 sets the basis of structural design, with the other Eurocodes dealing with different materials and specific aspects of design. Geotechnical aspects of design are covered by EN 1997 ”Geotechnical design“, usually called Eurocode 7. The evolution of the Eurocodes started in 2012 and the main objectives of their revision were to incorporate improvements that reflect the state‐of‐the‐art in engineering design and the needs of the civil engineering market, to improve the ease‐of‐use and to harmonize practice between countries. While the original version was developed largely based on soil mechanics, the aim was that the revised version treats soil and rock on an equal basis. The second generation of the Eurocodes is now nearly finished, and the revised EN 1997 is expected to be formally approved in 2024. This paper is the first of a set of six informative papers on the revised Eurocodes and rock engineering, prepared by members of the Rock Engineering Platform of CEN/TC250/SC7, a group of rock engineering experts that has been assisting in drafting EN 1997 from a rock‐engineering perspective. The paper presents the main changes to EN 1990 and EN 1997 as far as they affect geotechnical and rock engineering design.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it