Comprehensive index condition assessment of structural concrete based on surface wave techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To reliably assess the condition of concrete structures, a surface wave-based comprehensive index has been developed. Considering various factors (e.g., aggregate types) influencing the surface wave-based characteristics, a relative index for concrete condition assessment has presented. To address the conflicts between individual indexes, the weight for each index is determined in accordance with its credibility. The effectiveness of the proposed methodology is verified by using test results from six concrete beams with different void volume ratios. Hereby three characteristics of surface waves (i.e., P- and R-wave velocities, and attenuation coefficient) are used to diagnose the concrete beams. It is found that the comprehensive index has the advantage in handling abnormal measurements of the individual indexes by reducing their weights to lower their influence on the final diagnosis. Comparison of the diagnoses based on the comprehensive index and individual indexes reveals that the comprehensive index performs much better than any other individual index. It matches greatly with the compressive strength of the concrete beams obtained from the destructive test. In conclusion, the proposed methodology presents a single comprehensive diagnostic feature with improved reliability on the fitness of the concrete structures for decision-makers.
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".