MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414425334 · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-02098-7_23

Design of Timber Structures Subjected to Blast Loads

2025· book-chapter· en· W4414425334 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Viau, Abla Krouma, Ghasan Doudak

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer tracts in civil engineering · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis of Composite Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrofittingVulnerability (computing)Blast waveRenewable energyKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing global interest in sustainable and renewable construction materials has led to a rise in the number of mid- to high-rise timber buildings. As interest in these structures increases, understanding their behaviour under blast loads becomes crucial due to the heightened potential risk. The possibility of collapse of tall mass timber structures due to blast loads not only poses risks to occupants but can also cause significant damage to infrastructure. An overview of the key blast parameters and dynamic analysis approach used in blast design are discussed. Material characteristics of lumber, timber, cross-laminated timber, glulam and timber connections under blast loads as well as retrofitting options are reported from research findings and blast design standards. This chapter provides designers and engineers with a roadmap and design framework for blast analysis and design of a new structure or evaluation of blast vulnerability of an existing structure that might require retrofitting.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer tracts in civil engineeringSame topicStructural Analysis of Composite MaterialsFrench-language works237,207