MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W852590821

The Experimental Study for the Combustion-Property of Sandwich Panels using ISO 5660 Cone Calorimeter

2006· article· en· W852590821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Soo‐Young Park, Daehoi Kim, Hong-Soon Im

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Korean Institute of Fire Science and Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCone calorimeterIgnition systemCalorimeter (particle physics)CombustionTest methodFire performanceMaterials scienceStructural engineeringComposite materialComputer scienceMathematicsEngineeringChemistryFire resistanceStatisticsDetector
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays in Korea, KS F 2271(Testing method for incombustibility of internal finish material and element of buildings) has been using for the evaluation of fire safety performance of sandwich panels. The test method in Japan and in Korea was based on the same way. When the Japanese standard building code was revised in 2000, the test method in the ISO 5660-1 was adopted for the test method for combustion performance of internal finishing materials and elements of buildings. According to this, the revision version of draft substituting the test method in the KS F 2271 for one in the ISO 5660-1(Cone Calorimeter method) is informed in Korea. In this study, combustion properties of sandwich panels were tested using the cone calorimeter method. Ignition time, peak heat release rate and total heat released of four sandwich panels and four core materials (thermal insulation material), which are widely used in Korea, were tested. Test results were analyzed for each specimen. Finally, test results were classified by Japanese standard building code and Canadian NBC revised.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Korean Institute of Fire Science and EngineeringSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207