MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016465563 · doi:10.1139/l06-164

An experimental study on cyclic behaviour of reinforced concrete connections

2007· article· en· W2016465563 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gerson Moacyr Sisniegas Alva, Ana Lúcia Homce de Cresce El Debs, Mounir Khalil El Debs

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade de São Paulo
KeywordsStructural engineeringJoint (building)Compressive strengthBeam (structure)ReinforcementTransverse planeShear (geology)Column (typography)Reinforced concreteMaterials scienceDisplacement (psychology)Connection (principal bundle)Seismic loadingGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beam-column joints are considered critical regions within the structural system — especially under seismic loading — requiring careful design. Results from tests on four exterior reinforced concrete (RC) beam-column subassemblages are presented in this paper as part of an experimental investigation on the behaviour of RC beam-column connections under reversal cyclic loading. The influence of joint transverse reinforcement rate and concrete compressive strength on the RC beam-column connection behaviour was investigated. It is concluded that concrete compressive strength is the major factor that governs the joint shear capacity. The experimental results also indicated that joint transverse reinforcement affects the load-displacement response of such connections.Key words: cyclic loading, seismic analysis, reinforced concrete structures, beam-column connection.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations44
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207