MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Shear Strength of One-Way Concrete Slabs Reinforced with Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composite Bars

2005· article· en· W2044425964 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 Composites for Construction · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceFlexural strengthStructural engineeringComposite materialShear (geology)Reinforced concreteComposite numberReinforcementSpan (engineering)BendingShear strength (soil)EngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper evaluates the shear strength of one-way concrete slabs reinforced with different types of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) bars. A total of eight full-size slabs were constructed and tested. The slabs were 3,100mmlong×1,000mmwide×200mmdeep. The test parameters were the type and size of FRP reinforcing bars and the reinforcement ratio. Five slabs were reinforced with glass FRP and three were reinforced with carbon FRP bars. The slabs were tested under four-point bending over a simply supported clear span of 2,500 mm and a shear span of 1,000 mm. All the test slabs failed in shear before reaching the design flexural capacity. The experimental shear strengths were compared with some theoretical predictions, including the JSCE recommendations, the CAN/CSA-S806-02 code, and the ACI 440.1R-03 design guidelines. The results indicated that the ACI 440.1R-03 design method for predicting the concrete shear strength of FRP slabs is very conservative. Better predictions were obtained by both the CAN/CSA-S806-02 code and the JSCE design recommendations.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.204 · 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