MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289545176 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2021-0038

A parametric study on the cost optimization of a reinforced concrete abutment using a genetic algorithm

2022· article· en· W4289545176 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
T. Geetha Kumari, N. Srilatha, M. Charan Prasad, G. Phani Ram, M. Krishna Vineeth

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbutmentParametric statisticsStructural engineeringGenetic algorithmOptimal designCantileverComputationComputer scienceEngineeringMathematical optimizationMathematicsAlgorithmStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the cost optimization of a reinforced concrete abutment of a cantilever type using a genetic algorithm (GA). During the optimization process, six design variables, including two geometrical design variables and four cross-sectional design variables, were considered. The objective function consists of the cost of steel, concrete, and labor. Computation programs have been developed in JAVA to find an economical design adhering to Indian Road Congress (IRC) standards. To get an optimal solution in reasonable computational time, an attempt is carried out to evaluate the optimal GA parameters for the abutment model. A parametric study was conducted to understand the effect of the angle of friction, grade of concrete, and height on the cost optimization of the abutment. From the parametric study, it is observed that optimum cost of the abutment is obtained with a higher value of the angle of friction and concrete with a lower compressive strength. The results of the optimization are further discussed in detail.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.177 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207