MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130541870 · doi:10.2749/guimaraes.2019.0088

A review on experimental flexural cracking in FRP reinforced concrete members

2019· review· en· W3130541870 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cristina Barris, Paula Zubillaga, Lluís Torres

Bibliographic record

VenueReport · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticCrackingMaterials scienceRebarReinforced concreteFlexural strengthComposite materialStructural engineeringYoung's modulusEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to assess the relationship among crack width and several influencing parameters of Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Reinforced Concrete (RC) flexural members. A database with the results of 133 concrete specimens reinforced with different types of FRP bars available in the literature has been collected and analysed. A bond coefficientkb has been adjusted for the maximum crack width of all specimens by using ACI-440 and ISIS Canada design guidelines in the service range, obtaining a mean bond coefficient of 1.11 and 0.72, respectively. The effect of the surface treatment and modulus of elasticity of the FRP rebar, and then· ratio on the bond coefficient have been studied, obtaining no significant influence of the studied parameters due to the high scatter of 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReportSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207