Prediction of Failure Modes and Minimum Characteristic Value of Transverse Reinforcement of RC Beams Based on Interpretable Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shear failure of reinforced concrete (RC) beams is a form of brittle failure and has always been a concern. This study adopted the interpretable machine-learning technique to predict failure modes and identify the boundary value between different failure modes to avoid diagonal splitting failure. An experimental database consisting of 295 RC beams with or without transverse reinforcements was established. Two features were constructed to reflect the design characteristics of RC beams, namely, the shear–span ratio and the characteristic value of transverse reinforcement. The characteristic value of transverse reinforcement has two forms: (i) λsv,ft=ρstpfsv/ft, from the China design code of GB 50010-2010; and (ii) λsv,fc′=ρstpfsv/fc′0.5, from the America design code of ACI 318-19 and Canada design code of CSA A23.3-14. Six machine-learning models were developed to predict failure modes, and gradient boosting decision tree and extreme gradient boosting are recommended after comparing the prediction performance. Then, shapley additive explanations (SHAP) indicates that the characteristic value of transverse reinforcement has the most significant effect on failure mode, follow by the shear–span ratio. The characteristic value of transverse reinforcement is selected as the form of boundary value. On this basis, an accumulated local effects (ALE) plot describes how this feature affects model prediction and gives the boundary value through numerical simulation, that is, the minimum characteristic value of transverse reinforcement. Compared with the three codes, the suggested value for λsv,fc′,min has higher reliability and security for avoiding diagonal splitting failure. Accordingly, the research approach in this case is feasible and effective, and can be recommended to solve similar tasks.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".