MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Material Factor for GFRP RC Structures in Canada

2013· article· en· W2077171883 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jian Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced materials research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticBar (unit)Structural engineeringRelative humidityCurrent (fluid)EngineeringForensic engineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyElectrical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Degradation mechanisms of GFRP bar in real concrete are still not clear to civil engineers due to limited field applications. To avoid unsafe design, in current design codes a material factor is used to assure long-term safety of GFRP RC structures. This paper presents an assessment of material factors for GFRP bar as specified in Canadian Design Codes by predicting GFRP long-term performance with monthly average temperatures from 14 weather reporting stations in Canada. Results showed that the material factor varies from 0.57 to 0.61 for an application with 100% RH exposure, while a factor of 0.75 could be adequate for cases with exposure RH ≤90%. Considering the annual relative humidity across Canada, conclusion could be made that current factors in Canadian codes could provide sufficient safety margin.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced materials researchSame topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207