MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414436475 · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-02098-7_19

Lateral-Load-Resisting Systems (LLRSs) in Taller Timber Buildings

2025· book-chapter· en· W4414436475 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

VenueSpringer tracts in civil engineering · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic and Structural Analysis of Tall Buildings
Canadian institutionsAbbotsford Veterinary Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)Modular designCross laminated timberSpecial section

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present chapter examines different types of lateral-load-resisting systems (LLRSs) for taller timber buildings (TTBs). The LLRSs are presented with specific reference to their role in the seismic response of TTBs, and have been classified according to the main structural elements composing them. Therefore, timber-framed LLRSs, consisting of one-dimensional members, are first examined, followed by panelised LLRSs, featuring two-dimensional elements; mixed timber-framed and panelised LLRSs are then addressed. Next, hybrid timber-steel and -concrete, as well as volumetric modular LLRSs, are presented. Finally, a separate section is dedicated to the interaction of timber diaphragms with LLRSs in TTBs. Besides a comprehensive literature review, for each LLRS type, relevant examples of buildings realized in practice have been reported. In the final section, based on the analysed research studies from literature, the main future challenges and research directions for an effective, holistic design of LLRSs in TTBs, are addressed.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.180 · 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