MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Seismic Response and CFRP Retrofit of Poorly Detailed Shear Walls

2012· article· en· W2156803103 on OpenAlexaff
Hamed Layssi, William D. Cook, Denis Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composites for Construction · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceDuctility (Earth science)Composite materialRetrofittingBrittlenessReinforcementShear wallFlexural strengthShear (geology)Plastic hingeCarbon fiber reinforced polymerHingeStructural engineeringDissipationFibre-reinforced plasticReinforced concreteEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reversed cyclic loading behavior of full-scale shear wall specimens was investigated before and after retrofit. The wall specimens were designed and detailed to simulate nonductile reinforced concrete construction of the 1960s, having lap splices of the longitudinal reinforcement in the potential plastic hinge region, and having inadequate confinement of the boundary regions. The lap splices in these walls failed in a brittle manner before yielding occurred in the main flexural reinforcement. The use and effectiveness of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) wrap for improving the lap splice behavior and the shear strength of the walls were investigated. The walls were tested under reversed cyclic loading with loading applied near the tip of the walls. The retrofit technique improved the displacement ductility, energy dissipation, and prevented premature failure of the lap splices. The target ductility level of 2.0 was achieved with this CFRP retrofit.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Composites for ConstructionSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207