MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200455546 · doi:10.5267/j.esm.2021.10.002

Simplified equations for determining double-k fracture parameters of concrete for compact tension test

2021· article· en· W4200455546 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rajendra Kumar Choubey, Shailendra Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Solid Mechanics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTension (geology)Fracture (geology)Displacement (psychology)ComputationMaterials scienceCrack growth resistance curveStructural engineeringPolynomialCrack tip opening displacementFracture mechanicsMechanicsMathematicsCrack closureMathematical analysisComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthPhysicsEngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polynomial equations in non-dimensional form for various fracture parameters of double-K fracture model for compact tension specimen have been derived and presented in this paper. These equations can be used for computing different double-K fracture parameters of concrete for known material properties and specimen size having relative size of initial crack length of 0.3 without involving much complexity in numerical computations. Values of peak load and corresponding crack opening displacement as necessary to compute the double-K fracture parameters of concrete have been derived from the established fictitious crack model in the present study. A simplified equation in non-dimensional form between peak load and critical crack opening displacement as obtained from a fictitious crack model has also been presented.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering Solid MechanicsSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207