MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785061740 · doi:10.1680/jcoma.16.00073

Simplified shear-strength prediction models for steel-fibre-reinforced concrete beams

2018· article· en· W2785061740 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad S. Islam

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Construction Materials · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringShear (geology)Shear strength (soil)Reinforced concreteEmpirical modellingMaterials scienceEngineeringGeologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analytical models are proposed to predict the shear strength of steel-fibre-reinforced concrete beams from existing experimental results of 222 such beams without stirrups. The beams were sorted into six different types based on ultimate strength of concrete, span–depth ratio and shape of the steel fibres (plain, crimped and hooked). A genetic-algorithm-based approach was used to predict the most feasible equation to estimate the shear strength of each group of beams accurately. A variety of statistical analyses for each suggested model was performed and compared with the results of existing studies in predicting the beams’ shear capacity. The proposed empirical models were able to assess the shear strength of beams more accurately than previously developed models.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Construction MaterialsSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207