MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115958634 · doi:10.1139/l2012-014

Predicting reinforced concrete response to blast loads

2013· article· en· W2115958634 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Eric Jacques, Alan Lloyd, Murat Saatçioğlu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExplosive materialStructural engineeringImpulse (physics)Shock tubeDetonationDeformation (meteorology)Shock (circulatory)LS-DYNADisplacement (psychology)Computer scienceShock waveMaterials scienceEngineeringFinite element methodPhysicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer software was developed for inelastic analysis of structural members subjected to blast-induced shock waves. The software can predict the dynamic response of structural elements, provided the load–deformation characteristics are defined. The software has built-in capabilities to generate the load–deformation characteristics of common structural and non-structural members. Currently this capability includes reinforced concrete columns, one-way walls, beams, and one-way slabs. The input consists of member geometry, boundary conditions, dynamic material properties, explosive threat parameters, and desired performance levels. The results are presented in graphical format in terms of structural load–deformation characteristics, single degree of freedom displacement – time histories and iso-displacement pressure–impulse diagrams. The program was verified extensively using experimental data generated from simulated explosive loading of reinforced concrete members at the University of Ottawa shock tube testing facility. The shock tube has been shown to generate a wide range of pressure–impulse combinations, accurately simulating free-field detonation of high explosives of various mass and standoff distances.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations38
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207