MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Finite-Element Formulations for the Spatial Static Response of Steel Beams Bonded to a GFRP Plate

2014· article· en· W2129110084 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticFlangeMaterials scienceStructural engineeringShear (geology)AdhesiveFinite element methodComposite materialFlexural strengthKinematicsLayer (electronics)EngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study develops four finite elements (FEs) for the analysis of wide-flange steel beams reinforced with a glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) plate bonded together via an adhesive layer. The formulations treat each of the steel beams and GFRP plates as Vlasov-Gjelsvik thin-walled beams. Two elements are based on shear-deformable kinematics, whereas the other two are based on non-shear-deformable kinematics. The formulations capture the longitudinal-flexural and lateral-torsional responses of the system. Results are then compared with three-dimensional FE analysis solutions based on a current computer program, and the importance of incorporating shear-deformation effects is illustrated, particularly when predicting predominantly torsional responses. The formulation is used to investigate the interaction effect of the shear modulus of the adhesive layer and the length of the GFRP plate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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