MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7014994358

Review of the Resistance Factor for Steel

2000· article· en· W7014994358 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYield (engineering)Tension (geology)BendingSection (typography)ConcentricConversion factorMechanical resistanceFracture (geology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current resistance factor of 0.90 specified in CSA S16.1-94 “Limit States Design of Steel Structures” was reviewed for tension members failing by gross section yield or net section fracture, columns under concentric axial loads and laterally supported bending members. Large quantities of dimensional and material property data for rolled W, WWF and HSS shapes were collected. Analyses were performed, which allowed distinct populations within the large data sets to be discovered. The statistical parameters determined for geometric properties were similar to values reported in the landmark study by Kennedy and Gad Aly (1980). Yield strengths of HSS and WWF have improved. Resistance factors, Φ, were determined using the new resistance distributions based on a First-Order Second-Moment safety index, load statistics obtained from the literature, and load factors in the 1995 National Building Code of Canada (NBCC, 1995). When compared to Kennedy and Gad Aly (1980) the resistance factor has increased by an average of 0.046. A value of 0.95 is sufficient for laterally supported beams, stocky columns and tension members failing by gross section yield and a Φ value of 0.90 is sufficient for intermediate columns and tension members failing by net section fracture.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207