OpenVersion v1-b41f00013521293f40b4
SW1 / monotonic
SW1 · single-panel CLT wall
4,373 comparison points · 4 source records
LingoScholar / Cross-lab research
Open published-data benchmarks
Timber Benchmark ExchangeDifferent models.
Shared evidence.
Reproduce a documented experiment, submit your prediction and compare methods under the same measurement definitions.
Public cases and reviewed results are open. Submissions require approved academic access.
3 documented casesVersioned packages and original sources
0 published resultsContributor and software credit
Reviewed before publicationSeparate approval and release
01 / Reproducible starting points
Choose your benchmark
Starter cases are solid-wall experiments. Opening and VOL cases require further source curation.
Case documentation · version v1-b41f00013521293f40b4
SW1 · single-panel CLT wall
- Specimen / campaign
- SW1 · unbc-fastepp-2020-nailed-walls
- Protocol
- monotonic
- Geometry · H × W × t
- 3,000 × 1,200 × 191 mm
- Layer count / opening
- 7 layers · none
- Gravity load
- 20 kN/m
- Displacement definition
- actuator
- Force definition
- Signed Lead Actuator Force, kN (source column C). peakLoadKN is the largest absolute measured actuator force across the complete test.
- Reference displacement interval
- 0–119 mm
- Raw trace / comparison peak
- 41 / 41 kN
Published-data benchmark · first-excursion-envelope-v1
Fixed comparison trace: first use the atlas display reduction of original measured samples, then retain the first sample and every later sample whose displacement exceeds all previously retained displacements. Original force/displacement pairs remain unchanged and in acquisition order. This explicitly removes repeated excursions and sensor backsteps; it is not the complete measured history. The comparison domain begins at zero when bracketed by the trace, otherwise at the first nonnegative source displacement. Only comparison boundaries are linearly interpolated; no extrapolation or origin correction is applied.
4373 points retained; 18473 points omitted. Inspect the original curve CSV.
Sources, assumptions and limitations
Experimental Dataset.7z / Dataset 2 / SW1-2.5-2-20-m.xlsx; sheet "Conversion attempt test 1"; B8:C22853; header/unit rows 6–7 · CC BY 4.0
DOI: 10.17632/wz3d22bbhb.1CSCE 2022, PDF pp. 2–4, Section 2, Figures 2–3 and Table 1 · Bibliographic reference only; full text is not redistributed.
Engineering Structures 291 (2023), 116443; related report of the same campaign, linked by Fast + Epp project page · Bibliographic reference only; full text is not redistributed.
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116443All 22,846 finite measured B/C rows, in acquisition order. Columns extracted without offset correction, smoothing, sign changes or unit conversion. Original: SW1-2.5-2-20-m.xlsx; sheet "Conversion attempt test 1"; B8:C22853; header/unit rows 6–7 · CC BY 4.0
DOI: 10.17632/wz3d22bbhb.1Recorded assumptions
- This is an open benchmark: the experimental measurements are already published and accessible.
- Participants must reproduce the stated actuator force/displacement quantities, protocol and complete fixed displacement domain.
- Peak-force error uses the complete raw-series maximum absolute force, independently of the fixed comparison trace.
- The reference curve uses a disclosed reduction and first-excursion rule; compare the raw history when that rule is unsuitable.
- Calibration history and team affiliation are self-declared; an academic account does not establish independent model validation.
Limitations
- Actuator displacement is not the independent wall-top string-pot displacement. Outer-grain orientation, CLT species, moisture and individual failure sequences are not source-verified. No openings or VOL labels are inferred. Cyclic curves must not be treated as monotonic curves; stiffness and energy depend on the chosen protocol and definition.
- The initial exchange cases are solid CLT walls from one experimental campaign. They provide no validated opening or VOL reference case.
- The first-excursion trace omits unload/reload segments. Curve error does not assess those segments, cyclic behaviour, pinching, energy dissipation or damage evolution.
- Scores are descriptive comparisons with this version of the case. They do not certify structural design or identify a universally best model.
02 / Like-for-like comparisons
Results with the context intact
Compare one case version and one declared calibration group at a time. There is no combined leaderboard score.
“This campaign not used” is a contributor declaration. It is not independently verified.
No published results in this group yet
Be the first to contribute a documented prediction for SW1, or choose another calibration group.
Prepare a submissionAccessible numerical curve tables
| Point | Displacement (mm) | Force (kN) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | -0.0003 | -0.00019 |
| 2 | 0.04618 | 0.21992 |
| 3 | 0.04937 | 0.17427 |
| 4 | 0.11811 | 0.46627 |
| 5 | 0.12061 | 0.51312 |
| 6 | 0.12737 | 0.49666 |
| 7 | 0.19162 | 0.7589 |
| 8 | 0.19814 | 0.7831 |
| 9 | 0.26454 | 1.00391 |
| 10 | 0.26914 | 1.02325 |
| 11 | 0.34489 | 1.26381 |
| 12 | 0.34744 | 1.2826 |
| 13 | 0.41424 | 1.48943 |
| 14 | 0.41974 | 1.50887 |
| 15 | 0.49175 | 1.7358 |
| 16 | 0.49838 | 1.75603 |
| 17 | 0.56457 | 1.96738 |
| 18 | 0.57195 | 1.98021 |
| 19 | 0.63681 | 2.18766 |
| 20 | 0.64231 | 2.20062 |
| 21 | 0.71762 | 2.41669 |
| 22 | 0.72068 | 2.43093 |
| 23 | 0.78643 | 2.62701 |
| 24 | 0.79306 | 2.63879 |
| 25 | 0.86321 | 2.84399 |
| 26 | 0.87049 | 2.86258 |
| 27 | 0.93596 | 3.0526 |
| 28 | 0.9405 | 3.06938 |
| 29 | 1.01153 | 3.26813 |
| 30 | 1.01616 | 3.2844 |
| 31 | 1.08687 | 3.46642 |
| 32 | 1.09195 | 3.48776 |
| 33 | 1.16179 | 3.6809 |
| 34 | 1.16877 | 3.69229 |
| 35 | 1.23438 | 3.86998 |
| 36 | 1.23734 | 3.88518 |
| 37 | 1.30629 | 4.06311 |
| 38 | 1.31017 | 4.0761 |
| 39 | 1.38528 | 4.26522 |
| 40 | 1.38978 | 4.28236 |
| 41 | 1.45669 | 4.4564 |
| 42 | 1.46245 | 4.46677 |
| 43 | 1.53236 | 4.65573 |
| 44 | 1.53915 | 4.66302 |
| 45 | 1.60932 | 4.83202 |
| 46 | 1.6151 | 4.84306 |
| 47 | 1.68405 | 5.0146 |
| 48 | 1.68625 | 5.0278 |
| 49 | 1.75756 | 5.18414 |
| 50 | 1.7598 | 5.19132 |
Page 1 of 88
Select up to three published results above to overlay their predictions. Curve RMSE is withheld for incomplete reference-range coverage; inspect each metric’s availability reason.
Take the same starting point
Download the versioned geometry, source locators, comparison curve and metric definitions.
Document your method
Preview a local CSV, record software and assumptions, and state which campaigns informed calibration.
Share an inspectable result
After review and separate publication, share a frozen report with curve points, sources and contributor credit.
A growing research connection
LignoScope Research Studio
A future connection is planned around the exchange’s documented curve format. The program remains in development; direct integration is not available yet.