Cyclic performance of frames with prestressed steel–concrete composite beams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a study of the cyclic performance of moment-resisting frames with prestressed steel–concrete composite beams subjected to cyclic displacement reversals. The failure patterns, failure mechanism, hysteretic model, ductility, energy dissipation capacity, stiffness degradation, and deformation-restoring capacity of two composite frames are discussed. Larger slip could be observed along the beam span of the frame with the common composite beam in comparison with the prestressed composite beam. A four-linear hysteretic model with descending branches and two pinching pivot points is proposed for the two composite frames. Tests show that both the test frames failed in a beam side-sway mechanism within the plane of the frame, and the frame with the prestressed composite beam develops relatively high deformation restoring capacity. The applied prestressing in the composite beam has a small contribution to cyclic behavior of the composite frame. Studies also show that more energy is dissipated by the frame with the prestressed composite beam than that with the common composite beam.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".