Failure Mechanisms and Rehabilitation Scenarios for Concrete Hydroelectric Facilities Affected by Alkali–Aggregate Reaction
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 This work focuses on the failure mechanisms of concrete hydroelectric facilities affected by alkali–aggregate reaction (AAR). Identification of potential failure mechanisms is based on an original “top-down approach” using an AAR pushover analysis with multi-physics numerical simulation of a representative hydroelectric facility. Different global rehabilitation scenarios based on slot-cutting and grouting techniques are discussed and compared, using different performance metrics. A new quantitative performance metric, specifically developed for the nonlinear sophisticated analysis tool and considering the volumetric cracking caused by AAR is also suggested. Based on comparison results, a combination of grouting after a partial slot-cutting in the neighborhood of the discontinuities, appears to provide the best compromise in terms of stress relief and extent of cracking. New AAR benchmark problems, issued from the top-down approach, are also suggested for the first time in the literature.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it