Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Integrity-Reliability-Failure (IRF2016)
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
IRF2016 is the fifth international gathering of a prestigious series of Integrity-Reliability-Failure conferences coordinated by the International Scientific Committee of Mechanics and Materials in Design. This series of conferences are wholy devoted to advances in mechanics, materials, structural integrity and design. IRF2016 is jointly sponsored by the University of Porto and the University of Toronto, and it took place in the facilities of FEUP-Faculty of Engineering of University of Porto, in the beautiful city of Porto/Portugal, from 24 to 28 July 2016. The conference attracted over 200 participants with 220 accepted submissions involving 510 authors from 38 different countries around the world. The conference themes which address novel and advanced topics on Integrity, Reliability and Failure focused on Computational Mechanics, Experimental Mechanics, Fracture and Fatigue, Composite and Advanced Materials, Tribology and Surface Engineering, Mechanical Design and Prototyping, Biomechanical Applications, Civil Engineering Applications, Energy and Thermo-Fluid Systems, and Industrial Engineering and Management, among other topics. We believe that the meeting offered our delegates a forum for the discussion and dissemination of their recent work in assessing the integrity, reliability and failure of engineering structures, components and systems, fostered research that integrates mechanics and materials in the design process, and promoted exchange of ideas and international cooperation among scientists and engineers in this important field of engineering. We are particularly indebted to the authors and special guests for their presentations. Each of the 220 contributions offered opportunities for thorough discussions with the authors. Particularly, we acknowledge the excellent contributions of the participants, their innovative ideas and research directions, the novel modeling and simulation techniques, and the invaluable critical comments. We are also indebted to the outstanding keynote speakers who highlighted the conference themes with their contributions and covered the main topics of the conference. We also take this opportunity to thank the members of the International Scientific Committee and the reviewers for their time, effort and helpful suggestions. We offer our sincere gratitude to the symposia organisers for their efforts and valuable contributions to the success of the event, and the local organising committee for attending to the conference demands and delegates needs. All in all, IRF2016 was a great success and the credit must go to all the participants for their significant contributions and lively discussions, the keynote speakers for bridging the gap between the different disciplines and the organizing committee for an absolutely superb organization of the meeting in this magnificent city. To all of you, we offer our gratitude. Given the rapidity with which science is advancing in all areas of mechanics and materials, the next conference in this series (Mechanics and Materials in Design - M2D2017) will take place in Algarve, Portugal in June 2017. Undoubtedly, we expect M2D2017 to be as stimulating and interesting as IRF2016, as evidenced by the excellent contributions offered in this current event. We look forward to seeing all of you in Algarve 2017.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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