MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114427027 · doi:10.1139/l09-099

Behaviour of flexural plastic hinges under high seismic shear with consideration of concrete strength

2009· article· en· W2114427027 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Abdelsamie Elmenshawi, Tom Brown, Robert E. Loov

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexural strengthShear (geology)HingeStructural engineeringMaterials scienceStiffnessDuctility (Earth science)Shear strength (soil)Beam (structure)Plastic hingeGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialGeologyEngineeringCreep

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A successful seismic design for a reinforced concrete element is one that can postpone the shear failure until the required ductility and deformation capacity are obtained. After flexural yielding, shear deformations are the main causes for strength and stiffness degradation. An experimental program was carried out to explore the shear behaviour of flexural plastic hinges of elements constructed with different concrete strengths (30–175 MPa) tested under load reversals. The specimen represented a beam–column assembly and was designed to have the inelastic deformation at the beam end only. The research investigated the effect of shear deformations on the hysteretic behaviour and stiffness deterioration, cyclic shear demands, shear resisting mechanisms, and the effect of concrete strength on the hinge shear strength. It was found that the effect of concrete strength on beam shear strength under cyclic loading differs from that under unidirectional loading.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.176 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207