Forecasting of Shear Strength of Concrete Beam Reinforced with FRP Bar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study develops a new approach for forecasting shear Strength of concrete beam without stirrups based on the artificial neural networks (ANN). Proposed ANN considers geometric and mechanical properties of cross section and FRP bars, and shear span-depth ratio. The ANN model is constructed from a set of experimental database available in the past literature. Efficiency of the ANN model was compared with existing approaches in the literature using comprehensive database. ANN is powerful tools in solving complex problems of civil engineering. The Levenberg–Marquardt (LM) method was applied for training algorithm. These existing approach include the American Concrete Institute design guide (ACI 440.1R-06), ISIS Canadian design manual (ISIS-M03-07), the British Institution of Structural Engineers guidelines (BISE), JSCE Design Recommendation, CNR-DT 203-06 Task Group, and Kara. The results demonstrate that ANN method has good agreement in calculating the shear strength of concrete beam reinforced with FRP bar among existing equations in recent decades.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".