MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976994953 · doi:10.1680/jmacr.19.00083

Seismic behaviour of post-tensioned precast concrete beam–column connections

2019· article· en· W2976994953 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMagazine of Concrete Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecast concreteStructural engineeringGroutBeam (structure)Column (typography)Connection (principal bundle)Deformation (meteorology)EngineeringGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a post-tensioned precast concrete beam–column connection, the precast beams are post-tensioned to ensure the integrity of the connection and to provide recentring characteristics when the connection is subjected to seismic loads. In this study, the post-tensioned precast concrete beam–column connections were tested under reverse-cyclic loading with the test variables of grout strength at the beam–column interface and prestressing stress of stands. The test results showed that the post-tensioned precast concrete beam–column connections have a seismic performance equivalent to that of a conventional reinforced concrete beam–column connection. When high prestress is applied, however, confinement reinforcement is required at the beam ends to secure sufficient deformation capacity without crushing of concrete. An analysis model for post-tensioned precast concrete beam–column connections is also proposed; the model considers the bond properties of prestressing strands, and provides good agreement with the experimental results.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.262 · 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