A systems approach to evaluating group effect factors with simulated inclined self-tapping screw connections
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
An approach to evaluating the design resistance of a connection group was developed that treats the group as a system and considers effects from changes in mean resistance, variability, and reliability. The reliability term was evaluated using the first-order reliability method and a generic Weibull-distributed resistance and generally increased the factored resistance when variability decreased. The mean strength and variability terms were illustrated using simulations with input test data from inclined self-tapping screws with steel side plates. The mean strength was strongly affected by the mechanism by which displacement was applied to each row, while the strength variability tended to decrease with more screws, increasing the specified strength. Combined, the effects tended to increase the design resistance per screw above the design resistance of a single screw. Future experimental work to validate the simulations and establish relationships between mean strength and variability for various connection configurations was recommended.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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