MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911402799 · doi:10.1177/096369350201100602

In-Plane Testing of Damaged Masonry Wall Repaired with FRP

2002· article· en· W2911402799 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Fam, Daniel Musiker, Mervyn J. Kowalsky, Sami Rizkalla

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Composites Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasonryFibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceMasonry veneerStructural engineeringComposite materialDisplacement (psychology)BrickReinforcementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the performance of a masonry wall repaired with glass fibre reinforced polymer, GFRP sheets. The original reinforced clay brick masonry wall was tested under in-plane lateral cyclic loading. Failure occurred due to yielding of the steel reinforcement and crushing of the bricks. After epoxy injection of the cracks and patching of the missing portions, the wall was repaired using GFRP sheets, applied in the horizontal and vertical directions, on one face of the wall, including the joint between the wall and concrete footing. The repaired wall was tested to failure in the same manner of the original wall. The results show that the strength and displacement capacities of the wall were completely restored and even exceeded the original capacities.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations22
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Composites LettersSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207