MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6947763909 · doi:10.4224/20386388

Structural response model for wood stud wall assemblies: user manual

2003· report· en· W6947763909 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2003
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)CharringFeature (linguistics)User requirements documentGraphical user interfaceUser interfaceData modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Structural Model program is a numerical model that provides a structural analysis of load-bearing, gypsum-protected, wood-stud wall assemblies. Given specific input data, the program predicts the deflection, load-bearing capacity, and graphically displays the extent of charring of a wood stud. The user is able to view the data in both text and graphical form. One feature of this program is that the data from the Database of Wall-2D1, a heat transfer model developed by Forintek Canada Corp., can be loaded. The user can then perform an analysis based on temperatures imported from Wall-2D. In addition, temperature from experimental data can also be imported for analysis. The Structural Model User Manual is designed to familiarize the user with the program. The system requirements and installation procedures are explained, as well as the input requirements and the process for running tests. Each of the menu items (i.e. File, Help, Print, etc.) is described. The program includes an index that allows the user to look up topics for additional help. This manual is not meant to provide technical specifications nor details of the theory used in the model. These aspects are explained in other documents.2,3

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1590.058

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→