Seismic Rehabilitation of Deficient Exterior Concrete Frame Joints
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 performance of rehabilitated reinforced concrete beam-column joints was compared with the response of existing joints designed to preseismic codes to assess proposed rehabilitation techniques. Six beam-column subassemblies with nonductile reinforcement detailing were tested. The joints were subjected to quasi-static load that simulates seismic forces. The first three specimens had inadequate anchorage length of the bottom beam bars. Two of them were strengthened by using carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer sheets attached to the bottom beam face and then tested. The other three specimens had no steel ties installed in the joint zone, in addition to inadequate anchorage length of the beam bars. Two of the beam-column joints were strengthened by glass-fiber-reinforced polymer jackets of the joint zone and steel rods or plates. The rehabilitation techniques were found effective in eliminating the brittle joint shear and steel bar bond-slip failure modes, and ductile beam hinging instead occurred.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it