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
Although the steel–concrete interface (SCI) is widely recognized to influence the durability of reinforced concrete, a systematic overview and detailed documentation of the various aspects of the SCI are lacking. In this paper, we compiled a comprehensive list of possible local characteristics at the SCI and reviewed available information regarding their properties as well as their occurrence in engineering structures and in the laboratory. Given the complexity of the SCI, we suggested a systematic approach to describe it in terms of local characteristics and their physical and chemical properties. It was found that the SCI exhibits significant spatial inhomogeneity along and around as well as perpendicular to the reinforcing steel. The SCI can differ strongly between different engineering structures and also between different members within a structure; particular differences are expected between structures built before and after the 1970/1980s. A single SCI representing all on-site conditions does not exist. Additionally, SCIs in common laboratory-made specimens exhibit significant differences compared to engineering structures. Thus, results from laboratory studies and from practical experience should be applied to engineering structures with caution. Finally, recommendations for further research are made.
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 | 0.001 | 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