MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401154763 · doi:10.34001/ces.v4i01.438

STRUCTURAL PLANNING OF 4 FLOOR BULDING OFFICE OF HIGH PROSECUTORS, CENTRAL JAVA

2024· article· id· W4401154763 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

VenueJurnal Civil Engineering Study · 2024
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and construction materials studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringEngineeringForensic engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perencanaan Struktur suatu Konstruksi bangunan diperlukan untuk mendapatkan dimensi dan konfigurasi struktur yang paling efektif dan efisien. Perencanaan suatu struktur Gedung yang berada di wilayah rawan harus direncanakan sesuai standar, kuat, dan aman gempa. Perencanaan Struktur Gedung 4 Lantai Kantor Kejati Jateng, mengacu pada Persyaratan Beton Struktural untuk mengacu Bangunan Gedung dan Non Gedung (SNI 03-1726-2019) dan Beban Minimum untuk Perancangan Bangunan Gedung dan Struktur lain (SNI 03-1727-2013). Perencanaan Bangunan Struktur Gedung 4 Lantai Kantor Kejati Jateng ini meliputi perencanaan struktur atas dan struktur bawah. Perencanaan Struktur atas menggunakan SAP 2000 V14.2.2, sedangkan struktur bawah direncanakan secara manual. Struktur atas meliputi perencanaan atap, balok, kolom, dan plat lantai Gedung, sedangkan struktur bawah meliputi perencanaan pondasi. Pembebanan yang ditinjau untuk perencanaan elemen struktur adalah beban mati, beban hidup, dan beban gempa. Beban Gempa yang dimasukan adalah beban gempa dinamis.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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