MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238484297 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14665221

Investigation of the transverse and longitudinal moments at the transverse free end of deck slab cantilevers subjected to CHBDC truck loading

2021· preprint· en· W4238484297 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hanieh Pourmand

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCantileverSlabDeckTransverse planeStructural engineeringBending momentMoment (physics)Materials scienceEngineeringPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clause 5.7.1.3 of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC) specifies an equation for the calculation of transverse moment intensity (My) in the deck slab cantilever due to truck loading in a slab-on-girder bridge system. Also, it states that the transverse moment intensity shall be assumed 2My for the locations within a distance equal to cantilever length of the transverse free end of the deck slab cantilever. However, CHBDC design values do not consider the effects of barrier length, variable thickness of the barrier wall and shape of the cantilever’s edge stiffening on the response. In addition, the longitudinal moment on the deck slab cantilever due to truck loading is as yet unavailable. Thus, a parametric study was conducted, using the finite element modelling, to investigate the effect of these key parameters in the transverse and longitudinal moments at the region of the transverse free edge of deck slab cantilever. Based on the data generated from this parametric study, imperial equations for the transverse and longitudinal moments at the transverse end of the deck slab cantilever were deduced.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207