Assessment of the structural reliability of loadbearing concrete masonry designed to the Canadian Standard S304.1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A structural reliability analysis was performed on concrete masonry under axial compression using the First Order Reliability Method (FORM) to assess the reliability levels under the current (2004) and preceding (1994) editions of the Canadian masonry design standard S304.1. The Hasofer–Lind reliability index was evaluated at different live-to-dead load and snow-to-dead load ratios using the Rackwitz–Fiessler procedure. The reliability analysis revealed that neither the masonry material resistance factor of 0.6 adopted in the current Canadian masonry design standard (S304.1-04) nor the previous value of 0.55 in its predecessor (S304.1-94) achieve acceptable reliability levels for masonry in compression under combined dead and live or snow loads. Reliability levels close to the target reliability index recommended by the Canadian standard S408-11 and the levels evaluated for concrete in compression designed to the Canadian standard A23.3-04 were achieved when a masonry material resistance factor of 0.5 was used.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".