MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2487455024 · doi:10.1201/b21889-229

Effects of in-plane loading on the out-of-plane stability of slender reinforced concrete masonry shear walls

2016· book-chapter· en· W2487455024 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brook R. Robazza, T.Y. Yang, Kenneth J. Elwood, D. L. Anderson, Svetlana Brzev, B. McEwen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasonryMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringShear (geology)Shear wallPlane (geometry)Unreinforced masonry buildingComposite materialGeologyEngineeringGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter presents the experimental results of a research program that investigates the factors affecting the out-of-plane stability of slender Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls (RMSW) subjected to in-plane reversed cyclic loading, and the suitability of height-to-thickness (h/t) limits as a sole criterion for wall stability. The National Building Code of Canada prescribes different ductility-related force modification factors, Rd, for the design of masonry walls, which are based on the expected level of seismic performance and range from 1.0 for "Unreinforced Masonry Shear Walls" to 3.0 for "Ductile Shear Walls." All vertical reinforcing bars were continuous over the wall height, without the use of lap splices, and were anchored in reinforced concrete footings. The chapter focuses on the second phase of the experimental research program, which includes the testing of 8 full-scale RMSW specimens of varying h/t and height-to-length ratios, vertical and horizontal reinforcement content and detailing, applied axial stress, and geometric plan layout.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207