MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Theoretical Study Regarding the General Stability of Upper Chords of Truss Bridges as Beams on Continuous or Discrete Elastic Supports

2024· article· en· W4392644332 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInfrastructures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrussBucklingStructural engineeringBracingGirderChord (peer-to-peer)Bridge (graph theory)Truss bridgeEngineeringInstabilityStiffnessNonlinear systemComputer scienceBrace

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New or in-service truss bridges, with or without upper bracing systems, may display instability phenomena such as general lateral torsional buckling of the upper chord. The buckling of structural elements, particularly in the case of steel bridges, can be associated with the risk of collapse or temporary/permanent withdrawal from service. Such incidents have occurred in the case of several bridges in different countries: the collapse of the Dee bridge with truss girders in 1847 in Cheshire, England; the collapse of the semi-parabolic truss girder bridge near Ljubičevo over the Morava River in Serbia in 1892; the collapse of the Dysart bridge in Cambria County, Pennsylvania in 2007; the collapse of the Chauras bridge in Uttarakhand, India in 2012; and the collapse of a bridge in Nova Scotia, Canada (2020), and such examples may continue. Buckling poses a significant danger as it often occurs at lower load values compared to those considered during the design phase. Additionally, this phenomenon can manifest suddenly, without prior warning, rendering intervention for its prevention impossible or futile. In contemporary times, most research and design calculation software offer the capability to establish preliminary values for buckling loads, even for highly intricate structures. This is typically achieved through linear eigenvalue buckling analyses, often followed by significantly more complex large displacement nonlinear analyses. However, interpreting the results for complex bridge structures can be challenging, and their accuracy is difficult to ascertain. Consequently, this paper aims to introduce an original method for a more straightforward estimation of the buckling load of the upper chord in steel truss bridges. This method utilizes the theory of beams on discrete elastic supports. The buckling load of the upper chord was determined using both the finite element method and the proposed methodology, yielding highly consistent results.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.251 · 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