Monte Carlo simulation study on the reliability of concrete-filled HSS beam-column design provisions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revisions were recently proposed to the way in which concrete-filled hollow structural section members are handled in CSA S16. These revisions were based on previous research, comparisons to experiments, and a first-order reliability method analysis of existing provisions for compression and flexural members. In this paper, this topic is further expanded by using Monte Carlo Simulations (MCS) to determine the inherent reliability of the previous and new design rules for concrete-filled rectangular hollow section (RHS) and circular hollow section (CHS) beam-columns. A representative set of concrete-filled RHS and CHS members with variations in concrete strength, wall slenderness, effective length, and loading eccentricity are analyzed. Using MCS, the reliability index ( β+ ) of each is determined over a range of live-to-dead load ratios. Inherent β+ values are compared to the code-specified target (i.e., β+ = 3.0 per Annex B of CSA S16) and the CSA S16:19 and AISC 360-16 provisions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".