MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1531752318 · doi:10.14359/7407

Early-Age Cracking in Reconstructed Concrete Bridge Barrier Walls

2000· article· en· W1531752318 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueACI Materials Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Properties and Behavior
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersMinistère des Transports
KeywordsCrackingBridge (graph theory)Forensic engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An assessment of newly reconstructed reinforced concrete barrier walls on a highway bridge near Montreal indicated intense transverse cracking only a few days after concreting. Subsequent inspection of other concrete bridges in urban areas confirmed that such cracking is not uncommon. Analytical models, together with field and estimated data, were used to study the magnitude and roles of the factors that are the probable cause of this cracking. The results indicate that a combination of factors, such as temperature gradients, differential shrinkage and vibration due to traffic circulation, generated stresses that exceeded the low tensile strength of the young concrete.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.201 · 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