Effect of material uncertainty on the performance of bridge's pier-bent cap joints under cyclic loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current article deals with an investigational study on the bridge's pier-bent cap assemblies exposed to cyclic loading. In the study, four types of concrete are used—conventional reinforced concrete (CRC), fibre reinforced concrete (FRC), self-compacting concrete (SCC), and fibre reinforced self-compacting concrete (FRSCC)—to investigate the assemblies' behaviour using the concrete materials in the specified structural component. All the bridge element samples (8) are scaled down to one-twenty seventh for experimental purposes and correct performance results. The pier-bent cap subassemblies were exposed to cyclic loading tests to evaluate their crack generation pattern and resistive capability under seismic actions. The results are analysed as hysteresis behaviour, envelope pattern, stiffness behaviour, energy dissipation, and failure pattern. The study's findings are inspiring as the FRSCC outperformed the CRC in all the results along with ultimate strength, displacement ductility factor, and stiffness behaviour with 46%, 71%, and 74% improvements, respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".