MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Behavior of Transverse Confining Systems for Steel-Free Deck Slabs

2000· article· en· W2164917145 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bridge Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeckSlabGirderStructural engineeringTransverse planeWeldingUltimate tensile strengthReinforcementEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive research conducted over the past eight years in Canada has led to a concrete deck slab of girder bridges that can be entirely free of any tensile reinforcement. This slab, known as the steel-free deck slab, derives its strength from its internal arching action, which is harnessed longitudinally by making the slab composite with the girders, and transversely by restraining the relative transverse movement of the top flanges of adjacent girders. Two steel-free deck slabs have already been built, in which the transverse confinement is provided by welding steel straps to the girders. This paper presents test results on two other kinds of transverse confining systems, which are applicable to both steel and concrete girders. It is shown that the steel-free deck slab, in addition to being more durable than slabs with steel reinforcement, can also prove to be more economical.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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