MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394746286 · doi:10.62913/engj.v48i3.1012

Design of Braced Frames in Open Buildings for Wind Loading

2011· article· en· W4394746286 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

VenueEngineering Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBracingRoofStructural engineeringEngineeringCladding (metalworking)Wind engineeringBraced frameLow-riseGeotechnical engineeringFrame (networking)BraceMechanical engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Open-frame buildings are often used to provide a measure of weather protection over equipment or other sheltered storage on industrial sites. These shelters have a roof covering and minimal wall cladding, if any. ASCE 7 provides no guidance on the wind loads acting perpendicular to the frames that would control the design of the longitudinal braces. This paper summarizes wind tunnel tests that were performed on open-frame, low-rise buildings with a roof covering to determine the base shear and bracing loads parallel to the ridge. Two examples are provided to illustrate how the results of this study may be used to obtain the forces in longitudinal bracing.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.200 · 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