Artificial neural network model for deflection analysis of superelastic shape memory alloy reinforced concrete beams
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The need for a new model capable of accurately predicting the deflection of shape memory alloy (SMA) reinforced concrete (RC) beams is clear from the results obtained in the companion paper. In the present paper, artificial neural networks (ANNs) are utilized to develop such a model. The objective is to create a design tool for computing a reduction factor β to be used in the calculation of the effective moment of inertia for SMA RC beams. First, a database was developed using the results obtained from the parametric study reported in the companion paper. The main factors affecting the moment of inertia have been considered. The network architecture that results in the optimum performance was selected and trained. After demonstrating the network’s ability to predict output data for unfamiliar input data, the network was used to develop a design chart that provides the reduction factor β as a function of the reinforcement ratio and the reinforcement modulus of elasticity. A design example is discussed to illustrate the advantages of using the developed design chart over existing models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it