MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247859519 · doi:10.24018/ejeng.2020.5.12.2290

An Experimental Investigation of Mechanical Properties of Bonded Concrete

2020· article· en· W4247859519 on OpenAlexfundno aff
F. M. Tehrani

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Engineering and Technology Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative concrete reinforcement materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBeef Cattle Research Council
KeywordsMaterials scienceGroutShrinkageDurabilityComposite materialAdhesiveUltimate tensile strengthCreepFlexural strengthCompressive strengthBond strengthProperties of concreteShear (geology)Structural engineeringEngineeringLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an experimental study to measure mechanical properties of bonded concrete specimens. The bond between freshly mixed and hardened concrete has been a concern in repair and retrofit projects as well as staged construction of concrete members. This concern has roots in the time-dependent behavior of concrete, beginning with early-age concrete and continuing with long-term performance and durability of concrete. Moreover, environmental conditions generally complicate the behavior of concrete and resulted deformations such as shrinkage and creep. Application of chemical adhesives and epoxies is a common technique to enhance the bond at the interface of old and new concrete elements. The presented methodology includes preparation of bonded specimens with application of grout and adhesive agents. Mechanical strengths of specimens have been reported based on compressive, tensile, flexural, and shear testing. Results indicate that bonding agents are more effective in tensile and shear behavior of bonded samples.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Engineering and Technology ResearchSame topicInnovative concrete reinforcement materialsFrench-language works237,207