MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252903999 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14649795

Corrosion Resistance Of High-Performance Composite Beams

2021· preprint· en· W4252903999 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Ali Hossain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionMaterials scienceRebarComposite materialComposite numberCrackingDeflection (physics)Structural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research concentrated on the corrosion resistance of reinforced self-consolidating concrete (SCC), lightweight SCC (LWSCC), fiber reinforced LWSCC (FRLWSCC), Engineered cementitious composite (ECC) and composite (ECC-SCC/LWSCC) beams. The performance of corroded beams were analyzed based on current measurements, half-cell potential readings, crack pattern/width, rebar mass loss and diameter reduction from accelerated corrosion tests. Corroded and their companion uncorroded beams were tested to failure under four-point loading to evaluate load-deflection response, crack pattern, 1st flexure/diagonal cracking load, failure load and failure modes. Composite beams with higher ECC layer thickness exhibited superior corrosion resistance than their lower thickness counterparts and full depth SCC or LWSCC counterparts as well as performance of beams with ECC wrap was better than those with layer. Overall, ECC beams can be a superior alternative of their conventional counterparts and ECC can be used as layer or wrapping in conventional/LWSCC beams to enhance corrosion resistance and structural performance

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207