MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049890268 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2012-0041

Study on size effect of fibre reinforced polymer retrofitted reinforced concrete beam–column connections under cyclic loading

2013· article· en· W2049890268 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Achintya Choudhury, Sajal K. Deb, Anjan Dutta

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissipationMaterials scienceBeam (structure)Structural engineeringReinforced concreteComposite materialReinforcementPolymerColumn (typography)Connection (principal bundle)EngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies related to size effect are crucial for reliable assessment of behaviour of structural components subjected to dynamic loadings. The available theories of material behaviour that predict size effects are receiving increasing attention in the technical literature nowadays. This paper presents a study on size effect of fibre reinforced polymer retrofitted reinforced concrete beam–column connections based on experimental investigation under displacement controlled cyclic loading. Three different sizes of geometrically similar specimens have been considered to explore the possible existence of size effect. It was observed that the experimental results corroborate closely the size effect law proposed by Bazănt in all the cases studied. A parameter, energy dissipation of specimens per unit volume was introduced and its correlations with different drift angles for different sizes of the specimen exhibit the existence of size effect. Comparisons were also made among the tests results of control and retrofitted specimens in terms of gain in ultimate load carrying capacity and existence of size effect was distinctly observed.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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