Exact series solutions of composite beams with rotationally restrained boundary conditions: static analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The structural performance of composite beams is sensitive to load distribution as well as actual boundary conditions. Although the composite beam theory has been solidly established and exact solutions have been readily developed for various loading and boundary conditions, almost all of them are limited to classical boundary conditions (free, pinned and clamped) and there has been little discussion about the actual support conditions in real structures. The general representation of actual boundary conditions can be defined as rotationally restrained edges. In this research, an analytical model with exact series-type solutions was developed for composite beams with rotationally restrained edges. The model and displacement solutions were validated by other analytical methods and numerical results. The influence of rotational and end-slip restraints was investigated. It was found that the deflection and interface slip of composite beams are highly affected by both restraints introduced by the actual boundary conditions. The current model can be used as a benchmark for future design methods considering the realistic boundary conditions of composite beams.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it