MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396508135 · doi:10.22215/etd/2023-15931

The Lateral and Post-Impact Residual Lateral Strength of Reinforced Concrete Columns

2023· dissertation· en· W4396508135 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidualMaterials scienceImpact resistanceDeformation (meteorology)Structural engineeringReinforced concreteComposite materialReinforcementResidual strengthImpact energyGeotechnical engineeringGeologyMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lateral load resistance tests were conducted on 24 concrete columns with various reinforcement configurations and sizes by the author. Of these specimens, 13 were previously subjected to impact loading by Abdallah et al. and were used to evaluate the post-impact performance and lateral load capacity retention. From these tests it was determined that the CFST specimens exhibited both the largest lateral and residual lateral capacities of 37.37 kN and 40.17 kN, respectively. The CFST member had the highest retention of lateral load capacity for both low and high impact energy, retaining 75% and 107% of the capacity of the unimpacted specimen, respectively. Increasing the specimen diameter had no discernible effect on lateral strength retention but reduced the residual deformation especially at high impact energies with the residual deformation being reduced as much as 85% compared to the smaller specimen.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.245
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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207