MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026366603 · doi:10.1177/0731684413485488

Research and design guidelines for the construction of fiber-reinforced polymer reinforced concrete structures under fire exposure: A brief review

2013· review· en· W2026366603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
MA Faruqi, Gabriela Palestino Escobedo, Dazhi Sun, Joseph Sai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire effects on concrete materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialReinforced concretePolymerFibre-reinforced plasticFiberFiber-reinforced concreteFire performanceCarbon fiber reinforced polymerPolymer concreteFire resistanceCement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the state-of-the-art literature review for the behavior of fiber-reinforced polymer and performance of fiber-reinforced polymer reinforced concrete structures exposed to high temperatures. The article is organized into six parts. They are thermo-mechanical properties of fiber-reinforced polymer composites, bond characteristics of fiber-reinforced polymers at high temperatures, fire reaction properties of fiber-reinforced polymer composites, fire protection methods, performance of fiber-reinforced polymer reinforced concrete structures under fire conditions, and design codes. The design codes presented herein are that of American Concrete Institute and the Canada Standards Association. Sections pertaining to fiber-reinforced polymer fire design in these codes are discussed, including the future developments for enhancing the performance of fiber-reinforced polymer reinforced concrete structures under elevated temperatures.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reinforced Plastics and CompositesSame topicFire effects on concrete materialsFrench-language works237,207