MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381465509 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.8066158

CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF FRP-STRENGTHENED CONCRETE BRIDGE DIAPHRAGMS USING NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING

2023· paratext· en· W4381465509 on OpenAlexaffabout
Issa Fowai, Martin Noël, Beatriz Martín‐Pérez, Leandro Sanchez

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringFibre-reinforced plasticBridge (graph theory)Nondestructive testingEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbon fibre-reinforced polymer (CFRP) materials are lightweight, corrosion-resistant composite materials extensively used to strengthen or retrofit deteriorated concrete bridge components. The retrofitting process is usually a multi-stage manual process with the inherent capability of introducing defects at the various stages of work. In this paper, a methodological approach involving various nondestructive testing (NDT) techniques has been developed for a detailed condition assessment of the state of damage in deteriorated concrete bridge diaphragms. These three diaphragms from a major Canadian bridge were externally retrofitted with multiple layers of CFRP materials and subjected to years of environmental exposure. In addition, a detailed comparison of results obtained from the NDTs and visual inspection is presented. Several issues were identified, including CFRP delamination, material incompatibility, discolouration due to corrosion, inter-fibre cracks, and fundamental problems arising from the construction of the bridge diaphragms and installation of the CFRP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207