Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current Concrete Structural Design Code (2007) prescribe the equivalent rectangular stress block of the ACI 318 Building Code as concrete compressive stress distribution for design of concrete structures. The rectangular stress block may be enough for flexural strength calculation, but realistic stress-strain relationship is required for performance verification at selected limit state in performance-based design. Moreover, the ACI rectangular stress block provides non-conservative flexural strength for high strength concrete columns. Therefore a new stress distribution model is required for development of performance-based design code. This paper proposes a concrete compressive stress-strain distribution model for design and performance verification. The proposed model has a parabolic-rectangular shape, which is adopted by Eurocode 2 and Japanese Code (JSCE). It was developed by investigation of experimental test results conducted by the authors and other researchers. The test results cover high strength concrete as well as normal strength concrete. The stress distribution parameters of the proposed models are compared to those of the ACI 318 Building Code, Eurocode 2, Japanese Code (JSCE) and Canadian Code (CSA) as well as the test results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".