MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413524626 · doi:10.1061/jsendh.steng-14983

Methodology for Obtaining Aerodynamic Coefficients for Unified Wind Loading Provisions in ASCE 7

2025· article· en· W4413524626 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

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsStructural engineeringEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to develop a method to update and consolidate the aerodynamic coefficients that are currently in the directional procedure and envelope procedure for the Main Wind Force Resisting Systems (MWFRS) in Chapters 27 and 28 of ASCE 7-22. A large data set of wind tunnel data, including 85 building models with different geometries, was employed. Design pressure coefficients, and the zones on the building surfaces in which they apply, were developed to represent realistic spatial distribution patterns of the wind-induced pressures associated with critical structural responses. The pressure coefficient models, provided in a combined peak coefficient (GCp) form, are applicable to buildings of all (allowable) heights and aspect ratios. Nondimensional geometric parameters are used to capture the variations due to building shape and size for the pressure coefficients. The proposed provisions are a significant improvement in matching the wind tunnel data compared with existing provisions.

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 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 score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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