MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411052713 · doi:10.1080/17480272.2025.2511285

Effect of critical parameters on structural performance of balloon-type self-centering mass timber wall system

2025· article· en· W4411052713 on OpenAlexaff
K.G.M. Kandethanthri, Reza Abbasi Malekabadi, Ghazanfarah Hafeez, Zhiyong Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueWood Material Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceBalloonStructural engineeringComposite materialForensic engineeringEngineeringSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzed the structural behaviour of post-tensioned unbonded cross-laminated timber (UPTC) shear walls, employing a synergistic methodology that integrates numerical simulation with advanced machine learning (ML) techniques to deliver predictive insights on stiffness of balloon-type mass timber wall systems. It focused on assessing the influence of key structural parameters, including wall thickness, aspect ratio, tendon diameter, and post-tension stress, on the initial stiffness of UPTC shear walls. The findings revealed that enhancing wall thickness substantially increases the wall resistance to lateral loads, while the aspect ratio was identified as a significant factor in structural rigidity. Using ML, SHAP analysis emphasized the importance of wall dimensions and tendon stress for stiffness predictions.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWood Material Science and EngineeringSame topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207