MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2529242702 · doi:10.11575/prism/27872

Static and Fatigue Behaviour of Hybrid FRP-Concrete Bridge Truss Girder with Connections Reinforced with Double-Headed Bars

2014· dissertation· en· W2529242702 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Moravvej Hamedani

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPrecast/Prestressed Concrete Institute
KeywordsStructural engineeringTrussFibre-reinforced plasticGirderBridge (graph theory)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An innovative hybrid FRP-concrete bridge system for short- and medium-span bridges has been developed at the University of Calgary. This system is composed of concrete deck slabs composite with precast prestressed concrete truss girders, consisting of pre-tensioned top and bottom chords connected by vertical and diagonal truss members made of concrete-filled fiber-reinforced polymer tubes. The advantages of this system include reduced self-weight and enhanced durability. The objective of this research is to investigate the performance of the truss girder under static and fatigue loading. An experimental program including fabrication of ten full-scale truss girders with the number of panels varying from two to eight is presented. The effect of several parameters, such as the span-to-depth ratio and the amplitude of fatigue loading on the performance of the truss girder are investigated. The tests showed excellent performance of the girder system in terms of strength and stiffness.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)→Same topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete→French-language works237,207→