MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203941272 · doi:10.3934/matersci.2021043

Numerical investigation of reinforced-concrete beam-column joints retrofitted using external superelastic shape memory alloy bars

2021· article· en· W3203941272 on OpenAlexaff
Y. I. Elbahy, Maged A. Youssef, Mohamed E. Meshaly

Bibliographic record

VenueAIMS Materials Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSMA*Shape-memory alloyRetrofittingStructural engineeringParametric statisticsBeam (structure)Reinforced concreteMaterials scienceFinite element methodColumn (typography)ReinforcementComputer scienceComposite materialEngineeringMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<abstract> <p>The unique properties of Shape Memory Alloys (SMAs) have motivated researchers to use them as primary reinforcement in reinforced concrete (RC) structures. In this study, the applicability of using external unbonded SMA bars to retrofit RC beam-column joints (BCJs) is investigated. A three-dimensional finite element model, which simulates the suggested retrofitting technique, is first developed, and validated using ABAQUS software. The model is then further simplified and utilized to conduct a parametric study to investigate the behaviour of SMA retrofitted RC BCJs. Results of the parametric study are used to perform multiple linear regression analysis. Simple equations, which can be used to calculate the length and amount of SMA bars required to retrofit a RC BCJ, are then developed.</p> </abstract>

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIMS Materials ScienceSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207