MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W145193267

Assessing the Bond Quality of Pre-Stressing Strands with SCC Using NASP Test

2014· article· en· W145193267 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSHAREOK (University of Oklahoma; Oklahoma State University; Central Oklahoma University) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Quality (philosophy)PsychologyPhilosophyEpistemologyGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Important research in durability of self consolidating concrete structures dates back to 1980 in Japan. The lack of standardized test procedures, performance data and current design application uncertainty to members made with SCC had limited its acceptance in U.S despite of its increased use in Japan, Canada and Europe. SCC has drawn attention in pre-stressed industry due to benefit in enhancing construction productivity. Despite the interest in SCC and rapid development of SCC technology, its widespread use is restrained somewhat by the material and structural performance concerns, including the issue of bond. This thesis highlights effects of SCC on the bond performance of pre-stressing strands. The Standard Test for Bond (also called the North American Strand Producers Bond Test) was performed to evaluate the effect of 0.5 in strand with various SCC mixtures. Research variables include coarse aggregate content and sizes with a fixed rate of HRWRA and VMA. From these test, the pull out values are used to determine whether SCC causes a change in the bond strength of pre-stressing strand. With this, the effects of SCC proportions on the bond properties can be evaluated.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSHAREOK (University of Oklahoma; Oklahoma State University; Central Oklahoma University)Same topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207