MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6947745736 · doi:10.4224/20378987

UMAR theory & user manual: version 1.0

2002· report· en· W6947745736 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2002
Typereport
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuadrilateralOrthotropic materialSolverDirect stiffness methodFinite element methodCartesian coordinate systemIsotropyTrussDomain decomposition methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Program UMAR, which stands for Unified Method of Analysis for Rehabilitation, is a general-purpose finite element program for rehabilitation analysis and design of various structural and building components. UMAR solves for the static response of linear and non-linear two- and three-dimensional structural systems under the action of mechanical loads. The computer program can include time-dependent phenomena such as creep, shrinkage and cyclic loading. UMAR also offers transient analysis capabilities for parabolic initial-value problems in fluid mechanics, and it can couple this type of analysis with that due to mechanical loads. Some features which are available in the program include:Multi-field/physics analysis capabilities to couple heat-mass transfer problems with stress problems;Element options to model addition or removal of elements (material) in the physical system to simulate construction/rehabilitation processes;Six basic elements for structural analysis: a space truss element, a shear connector element, a quadrilateral membrane element, a quadrilateral plate-bending element, a quadrilateral shell element, and a layered-solid element. All the quadrilateral elements can be layered in the out-of-plane direction. The membrane and solid elements can also be used for transient analysis;Prescribed nodal displacements and/or surface traction options for structural analysis;Prescribed nodal values and/or surface flux options for transient analysis;Prescribed arbitrary load-time functions (both mechanical and environmental);Comprehensive library of material models: isotropic linear-elastic, orthotropic linear-elastic, transversely-isotropic linear-elastic, orthotropic hypo-elastic, elasto-(plastic)-damage, and a family of multi-yield elasto(-visco)-plastic;Several symmetric and non-symmetric matrix equation solvers: LU decomposition solvers for banded and full matrices, a sky-line solver for banded matrices, a domain decomposition solver, a symmetric frontal solver, and a Gauss-Seidel iterative solver;ASCII input file, where data is organised into recognisable blocks. Program UMAR is written in Fortran 90, and the executable is available for PC computing platforms by compiling and linking the code with the Compaq Visual Fortran 6.1a compiler.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3010.216

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.208 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→Same topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism→French-language works237,207→