MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394746150 · doi:10.62913/engj.v38i3.761

Seismic Behavior and Design of Concentrically Braced Steel Frames

2001· article· en· W4394746150 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Robert Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute of Steel Construction
KeywordsBracingBraced frameStructural engineeringSeismic analysisGeologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringBraceFrame (networking)Mechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the main characteristics of the inelastic seismic response of concentrically braced steel frames. Current Canadian and U.S. provisions for the seismic design of these structures are presented and discussed, together with possible modifications that are currently being considered in view of recent research findings. Alternative bracing systems, which have been proposed over the years to improve the seismic response of concentrically braced steel frames, are also briefly 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering JournalSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207