MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125535251 · doi:10.1155/2021/1562158

Experimental Investigation of Impact Response of RC Slabs with a Sandy Soil Cushion Layer

2021· article· en· W3125535251 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

VenueAdvances in Civil Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCushionLayer (electronics)Geotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringGeologyEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact response of reinforced‐concrete (RC) slabs covered with a sandy soil cushion layer was investigated using an outdoor rockfall impact test platform. Impact tests were carried out by releasing rockfalls with different weights from different heights to impact a combined structure. Test data included the acceleration duration curve of the rockfall, strain of the concrete slab at multiple measuring points, and midpoint displacement duration curve of the slab. The test results showed an exponential relationship between the impact force acting on the cushion layer surface and cushion layer thickness. An empirical formula was used to calculate the maximum penetration, and the result was in good agreement with the test value. In addition, the attenuation rate of the impact force acting on the cushion layer increased exponentially with the increase in the cushion layer thickness, and the peak impact force could be attenuated by approximately 70% at a thickness of 0.6 m. Finally, the failure process and failure modes of the RC slabs were investigated.

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)0.000
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 score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.237 · 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