Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major obstacles preventing the wide use of polymer composites in structural application is the absence of unified and authoritative design standards. In the USA, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Pultrusion Industry Council (PIC) of the Society of the Plastics Industry have realized the urgent need for such a document. A national consensus design standard is required to provide reasonable reliability and safety and to encourage the use of composites by practising engineers. Recently, similar positive efforts have been initiated in Japan, Canada, and Europe. In 1995, a joint project between the ASCE and the PIC was initiated to provide this essential document. The project was designed as a multi-phase effort to produce the final standard document for design of pultruded composite structures. The first phase of this joint project was completed in 1996. In this project, the author acted as a technical expert and the developer of the prestandard technical database for the general contractor, Chambers Engineering, Canton, Massachusetts. This paper summarizes the activities and the content of the Phase I ASCE/PIC Prestandard Document that covered standards for structural design, fabrication and erection of pultruded FRP structural shapes, plates, and rods. A description of the literature survey and the state-of-the-art technical data is presented. The paper also presents the scope and organization of the individual chapters that were developed. (a) For the covering entry of this conference, please see ITRD abstract no. E204495.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.169 | 0.109 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".