MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Ductility of Reinforced Concrete Flat Slab-Column Connections

2005· article· en· W2054881496 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Anna Polak

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringDuctility (Earth science)SlabPunchingFinite element methodReinforcementRetrofittingMaterials scienceShear (geology)Reinforced concreteEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The article presents experimental and analytical research on providing adequate ductility and rotational capacity to reinforced concrete slab-column connections. Post peak-load ductility of connections in reinforced concrete framed structures is essential for ensuring structural integrity and preventing local failure that may lead to progressive collapse of such systems. The importance of ductility for resistance against abnormal loading and the role of transverse reinforcement in providing ductility is discussed, and a new shear-strengthening technique, shear bolts, is presented. Shear bolts are a special type of reinforcement developed specially for retrofitting of existing, previously built, flat slabs. The results of an experimental work are presented which show how transverse reinforcement increases punching shear capacity and post-failure ductility of slab-column connections. The described work also applies a specially developed finite element formulation based on layered shell elements, to the analysis of continuous reinforced concrete slabs. The formulation is applicable for global structural analysis of slabs failing in flexure or punching modes. The finite element and experimental results are compared in the article.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations32
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueComputer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering→Same topicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis→French-language works237,207→