MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388133595 · doi:10.21660/2023.111.4050

PROPOSED FORMULATION FOR PREDICTING DEFLECTIONS OF CFRP-RC BEAMS

2023· article· en· W4388133595 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geomate · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
KeywordsStructural engineeringReinforced concreteMaterials scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research describes an attempt to conduct analytical investigations on the deflection behavior of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP)-reinforced concrete beams.The primary objective of this study is to undertake a comprehensive review of formulation studies grounded in deflection equations.To accomplish this objective, a total of eleven test data points from three groups of researchers were acquired.Then, these data are compared against the deflection predictions from four deflection equations, namely, ACI 440.1R-06,ACI 440.1R-15,Bischoff and Gross, and ISIS Canada.An empirically derived model was proposed to predict the effective moment of inertia for reinforced concrete (RC) beams reinforced with CFRP, based on Branson's equation.Furthermore, to enhance the prediction of the moment-deflection relationship up to the ultimate strength, a nonlinear parameter (k) has been introduced in previous research for FRPs.These parameters were added to the formulation and aimed to mitigate the impact of the cracked moment of inertia on the reinforced concrete member.The accuracy of the novel formulation for analyzing deflections in CFRPreinforced concrete beams was statistically evaluated.In a comparative study employing various design codes, the proposed model exhibited greater agreement with experimental test results.Ultimately, the proposed model demonstrated enhanced accuracy and emerged as a familiar approach for structural engineers to forecast and evaluate the deflection behavior of RC beams reinforced with 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of GeomateSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207