Load-Displacement of Masonry Panels with Unbonded and Intermittently Bonded FRP. II: Analytical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having evaluated the adequacy of the analytical model described in Part I, it was used to investigate the impact of some of the most influential parameters on the postcracking lateral pressure-displacement behavior of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP)-reinforced masonry wall panels. The analytical study was divided into two parts. The first part is an extension to the experimental program that reports on a study of the interaction at various levels of the different parameters investigated experimentally. The second part of the analytical investigation focused on defining limitations and providing answers to some design questions. These included the limiting aspect ratio of the wall beyond which two-way action of the panel is insignificant, the optimum bond configuration of the FRP reinforcement to the masonry wall, and the effect of the mechanical properties of the FRP reinforcement. Some valuable knowledge has been generated in this investigation covering a relatively wide range of parameters. This knowledge was utilized in developing design guidelines for calculating the ultimate lateral load capacity and displacement of masonry wall panels reinforced using unbonded and intermittently bonded FRP reinforcement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".