MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Influence of Steel Fibers and Headed Bars on the Serviceability of High-Strength Concrete Corbels

2012· article· en· W1993906694 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsServiceability (structure)Materials scienceReinforcementStructural engineeringComposite materialWeldingStiffnessDuctility (Earth science)DurabilityTension (geology)Ultimate tensile strengthEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vertical loading tests are reported for six double-sided, high-strength concrete corbel specimens. The primary variables of the investigation were the percentage of steel fibers and the anchorage method of the main tension tie. The test results indicated that performance in terms of load-carrying capacities, stiffness, ductility, and crack width was improved, as the steel fibers were added and the percentage of steel fibers was increased. The corbel specimens with headed bars used as the main tension-tie reinforcement showed superior load-carrying capacities, stiffness, and ductility compared with the corbel specimens in which the main tension ties were anchored by welding to the transverse bars. From the test results, it is expected that the load-carrying capacities, serviceability, and durability of high-strength concrete corbels would be improved by using steel fibers and headed bars. Experimental results presented were also compared with various prediction models.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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