Simple Rational Model for Reinforced Concrete Subjected to Seismic Shear
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A model is presented that can predict the load-deformation response of reinforced concrete subjected to reverse-cyclic (seismic) shear. Average strains due to crack displacements are separated from concrete strains according to simple assumptions resulting in a rational model that can account for the two sets of cracks that are open when applied shear reverses direction. Closing cracks are assumed to close as a function of the compression stress applied normal to cracks, while opening cracks open as necessary to maintain compatibility of concrete and reinforcement strains. With the separation of strains due to crack displacements, simple material stress-strain relationships for concrete and reinforcement are sufficient to capture the complexities of reverse-cyclic response. The model accurately predicts underlying mechanisms such as accumulation of plastic strain in reinforcement, which defines the degree of pinching in the hysteretic response of reinforced concrete subjected to reverse-cyclic shear. Concrete shear failures are captured by a limit on ultimate shear strain that depends on the shear strain at first yielding of reinforcement and the ratio of shear stress to concrete strength.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".