MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design Recommendations for Externally Restrained Highway Bridge Decks

2001· article· en· W2109880686 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bridge Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaDalhousie University
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsServiceability (structure)SlabStructural engineeringCorrosionDeckBridge (graph theory)EngineeringBridge deckDesign loadForensic engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A severe maintenance penalty exists for composite multibeam highway bridges in areas where the use of deicing chemicals is prevalent. This maintenance concern is largely due to the corrosion of embedded steel reinforcing bars and the attendant concrete degradation in the deck slab. Transverse steel straps, placed below the concrete slab, eliminate the deleterious effects of corrosion on the concrete. Further, the straps can be designed to provide the restraint necessary to promote the development of internal arching in the concrete slab in response to a concentrated load. A design procedure is presented for an externally restrained highway bridge deck. The method has been developed, based on the Canadian Limit States design philosophy, considering both the strength and serviceability requirements. It is demonstrated that the ultimate strength requirements dictate the external restraint requirements, and a numerical example of the design procedure is given.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.225 · 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