RILEM TC "Reinforcement of Timber Elements in Existing Structures"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper reports on the activities of the RILEM technical committee Reinforcement of Timber Elements in Existing Structures. The main objective of the committee is to coordinate the efforts to improve the reinforcement practice of timber structural elements. Recent developments related to structural reinforcements can be grouped into three categories: (i) addition of new structural systems to support the existing structure; (ii) configuration of a composite system; and (iii) incorporation of elements to increase strength and stiffness. The paper specifically deals with research carried out at the Bern University of Applied Sciences Switzerland (BFH), the University of Minho Portugal (UniMinho), and the University of Trento Italy (UNITN). Research at BFH was devoted to improve the structural performance of rounded dovetail joints by means of different reinforcement methods: i) self-tapping screws, ii) adhesive layer, and iii) a combination of self-tapping screws and adhesive layer. Research at UNITN targeted the use of dry connections for timber-to-timber composites, specifically reversible reinforcement techniques aimed at increasing the load-bearing capacity and the bending stiffness of existing timber floors. At UniMinho, double span continuous glulam slabs were strengthened with fibre-reinforced-polymers. All three examples demonstrate the improved structural performance of timber elements after reinforcing them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".