MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050610477 · doi:10.1139/l07-139

Proposal of a test specimen to evaluate the shear strength of vertical interfaces of running bond masonry walls

2008· article· en· W2050610477 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Valentim Capuzzo Neto, Márcio Roberto Silva Corrêa, Márcio Antonio Ramalho

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsMasonryStructural engineeringFinite element methodShear wallShear strength (soil)Shear (geology)Materials scienceDirect shear testGeotechnical engineeringGeologyEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is no normalized test to assess the shear strength of vertical interfaces of interconnected masonry walls. The approach used to evaluate this strength is normally indirect and often unreliable. The aim of this study is to propose a new test specimen to eliminate this deficiency. The main features of the proposed specimen are failure caused by shear stress on the vertical interface and a small number of units (blocks). The paper presents a numerical analysis based on the finite element method, with the purpose of showing the theoretical performance of the designed specimen, in terms of its geometry, boundary conditions, and loading scheme, and describes an experimental program using the specimen built with full- and third-scale clay blocks. The main conclusions are that the proposed specimen is easy to build and is appropriate to evaluate the shear strength of vertical interfaces of masonry walls.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207