MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808447416 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2018-0046

Experimental investigation on the structural performance of a reinforced cold-formed steel beam–column joint

2018· article· en· W2808447416 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jihong Ye, Wei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJiangsu University of Science and TechnologyGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceJiangsu University
KeywordsFlangeStructural engineeringJoint (building)Moment (physics)Beam (structure)Bending momentFlexural strengthPure bendingDeformation (meteorology)BucklingBendingNonlinear systemMaterials scienceCold-formed steelEngineeringComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A reinforced beam–column joint specific to mid-rise cold-formed steel (CFS) dwellings was proposed and studied by six full-scale cyclic loading tests. Afterwards, a moment–rotation relationship prediction model and a numerical model of the joint were established. The results show that: (i) the joint has a certain bending moment transmission capacity; (ii) the joint’s moment–rotation curve has distinctive three-stage deformation characteristics, including elastic, nonlinear, and failure stages successively; the structural performance of the joint is better and more in line with the requirements of mid-rise CFS dwellings than conventional joint; (iii) the elastic buckling strength of beam flange can be taken as the elastic limit of the joint, and the ultimate bending moment of the joint is determined by elastic flexural capacity of beam section; (iv) the prediction model and the numerical model can be used to establish an overall model of mid-rise CFS dwelling with consideration of joints’ nonlinear behaviour.

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 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 score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

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 head0.180
Teacher spread0.167 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207