Evaluation of two metal covering system solutions for the construction of 30-meter span industrial buildings in Metropolitan Lima
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En el Perú, y más específicamente en Lima Metropolitana, el tema de soluciones de coberturas metálicas para naves industriales no es muy utilizado debido a la falta de conocimiento del mismo. Sin embargo, la necesidad de estas edificaciones se va incrementando a un ritmo acelerado debido a la industrialización de las pequeñas y grandes empresas. El objetivo de este estudio es proponer dos sistemas (Techo parabólico y Armadura tipo Warren) para un caso de naves industriales de 30 metros de luz y poder comparar los resultados obtenidos tanto de tiempos de construcción como de costos. De acuerdo a los resultados obtenidos podemos concluir que entre los dos sistemas el más óptimo en costo y tiempo es el tipo parabólico debido a que estructuralmente los elementos a utilizar tienen un menor esfuerzo comparados con la armadura tipo Warren usando los mismos perfiles y bridas superiores e inferiores.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".