MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412401832 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2025-0066

Structural fire comparison of char depth and explicit temperature thermal damage models

2025· article· en· W4412401832 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Felix Wiesner, Arwa Abougharib, Maanav Bhushan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire effects on concrete materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharEnvironmental scienceThermalFire resistanceStructural engineeringGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceForensic engineeringWaste managementComposite materialEngineeringPyrolysisMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Char depths in fire damaged timber are often used as a substitute to infer equivalent fire resistance for tests without structural load applied. However, the thermal profile in mass timber can differ markedly between compartment fires with a cooling phase and fixed duration standard furnace tests. This technical note evaluates publicly available temperature and charring data from a fully developed open plan mass timber fire test to compare structural capacity throughout the fire based on two thermal damage models. The first method uses measured char depth and an assumed zero-strength layer, while the second method utilises the measured temperature profile. Both damage models were applied to the same structural calculations. The results show that, in absence of sprinkler or fire service intervention, structural capacity reduction is more severe when actual temperatures are considered. These outcomes are of interest to interpret data from fire tests with respect to fire resistance.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicFire effects on concrete materialsFrench-language works237,207